Category Archives: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

Pat Robertson Displays his Christianity, again…

The people of Dover, Pennsylvania recently had an election for their local schoolboard. In a fairly close election, every member of the school board that supported the addition of intelligent design to their school curriculum was voted out, all eight of them. What did Pat Robertson have to say about the free exercise of people’s rights to hold elections?

I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don’t wonder why He hasn’t helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I’m not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that’s the case, don’t ask for His help because he might not be there.”

I… just… am speechless.

Another Scoble-ism

Scobleizer: Microsoft Geek Blogger

Windows isn’t what whas broken. Windows DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES were what was broken.

The two are intimately related. Can you honestly say that you have an example of a program which worked well, despite the development process being completely broken? It just doesn’t happen. The article that Scoble quoted quoted Microsoft VP Jim Allchin:

“It’s not going to work,” he told Gates in the chairman’s office mid-2004, the paper reports. “[Longhorn] is so complex its writers will never be able to make it run properly. ”

That is a broken development process, producing broken software, and only a little over a year ago. We are in the third quarter of 2005 now, and only now are we hearing of the sweeping changes that Microsoft thinks are necessary to become innovative.

It is absolutely startling to me that a multi-zillion dollar mega-empire like Microsoft only recognized last year that perhaps they should work toward “developing a solid core for Windows”.

Longhorn/Vista was broken. Clearly. Whether it is still broken when it ships remains to be seen, but it seems like in a few years, someone is going to have enough material to write a suitable sequel to an old software engineering standby.

Apple to buy TiVo?

Intriguing rumor that hit Wall Street today. It would be great if my favorite consumer appliance got acquired by someone who could prevent its long, slow descent into the tar pits.

Of course, they’d probably change the name to iTv or something, and it would be a sterile white instead of the comforting black. Actually, it could probably just be a Mac Mini…

Wil Wheaton chimes in on ASCAP Podcast Licensing

Wil Wheaton has some distinctly harsh words for the notion that ASCAP now will sell you a license to play music on your podcasts. Peter Kim responded that:

Wil, you WOULDN’T pay for an individual song. ASCAP licenses are blanket licenses, and the interactive minimum pricing they’ve set below $300/yr. Once you have the license, ALL ASCAP music is legal to play. (Some people might actually be making money from online distribution . . .)

Frankly, I’m not at all upset with ASCAP. I simply don’t use any of their music, because I can’t afford it. $300 dollars a year exceeds the budget of all other expenses I incur to put out my podcast, and I can’t justify it. That’s fine, I’m comfortable using music from more friendly labels like magnatune or music which is licensed directly by artists under liberal Creative Commons licenses.

It does bring up something interesting though: they charge roughly $300 to license the playback of ANY of the music under their catalog. Doesn’t it seem odd that the penalties for copyright infringement are so draconian by comparison? Just as someone noticed with Napster (which grants a license to play any music they have for a mere $15 a month), doesn’t this ASCAP license fee structure imply that the real damages caused by any individual act of copyright infringement is incredibly tiny?

That Whiff of Decay…

Michael Malone has an article which has been going around the blog circuit, hypothesizing that there may be a whiff of decay about Microsoft, that the Redmond empire may have chinks in its armor.

Hey, it’s a popular idea, at least among the Open Source beatniks that I normally hang with. But we all know that their opinions are often formed by fanaticism rather than pragmatism. But just because they are fanatical is not a guarantee (or even evidence) that they are wrong.

Microsoft cheerleader Robert Scoble has something to say to counter this idea. But strangely enough, I sense more of the decay in the answer than I did in the original question.

It’s perhaps an unavoidable but nevertheless sad feature of decay that those close to it often deny that such decay is going on. In my experience, the more strident the assertion that all is well, the more uneasy I feel about the future direction.

Microsoft has given us plenty to be concerned about. Security and reliability of Microsoft products continue to be at the forefront of all sane consumers worries. Let’s face it, when you can only rely on your computer to be free from viruses for a few minutes after connecting it to the Internet, you are entirely justified to be concerned.

What does Scoble have to say?

Also, when I talk with “regular people” (you know, the people who don’t write code, but use computers) they kept telling me “solve your security/phishing/malware/spyware problems.” Or, “why do we need 3D graphics? Why can’t you make the performance/reliability/usability of Windows better?”

In fact, go back a few weeks where I asked my readers for what things they wanted Microsoft to do. Overwhelmingly you all said to focus on the basics and nail those. I don’t remember anyone asking for new 3D graphics.

A few weeks? People have been agonizing over problems caused by viruses and spyware for years. Granted, these problems have escalated dramatically in the last few years, but it’s not like anyone with any reasonable vision at all couldn’t have predicted this outcome. The idea of having untrusted code running in the context of a browswer or mail program was imbecilic to begin with. It constantly shocks me that class action lawsuits have not been filed against Microsoft for the absolute havok that this idea has perpetrated on consumers.

Longhorn is now years late because, as Scoble says, the Longhorn of PDC03 is no more, replaced by a new vision. I’m left wondering why they didn’t envision a secure, reliable operating system two years ago, and are only now beginning to come to grips with this basic idea.

Sliding down the slippery slope

I’m not paranoid.

Damn, I just realized that by saying it, I probably am, but holy-land-o-mercy. Have people gone completely insane?

A high school in Sutter California has ordered all students to wear mandatory RFID tracking tags.

The badges introduced at Brittan Elementary School on Jan. 18 rely on the same radio frequency and scanner technology that companies use to track livestock and product inventory.

Well folks, the transformation from “place of learning” to “place to store livestock and/or criminals (your pick)” is complete. And people wonder why academic achievement in the United States is so low.

It’s absurd to think that a group of 600 children in rural California need to have tracking devices akin to those attached to sexual predators just so that they can prevent vandalism and “speed up taking enrollment”. If I were a parent in their district, I’d be completely outraged. What this really appears to be is a draconian measure designed to limit the involvement (and thereby, the expense) of having teachers and staff deal directly with students and their problems.

Most kids aren’t criminals, but treating them like they all are will certainly not help. It’s your job to teach kids and help them become good members of society: do you really think that “we are watching you all the time?” is the message that you need to send to them to make them behave?

You’re not in the middle of Richmond or L.A. for pete’s sake. You’re in podunk rural California, and you are dealing with kids who are 14 and under. Get some perspective, man.

InformationWeek Weblog

“If you’re getting into open source because you see it as a career path, you’re doing something wrong.” It’s not that Linux creator Linus Torvalds thinks open-source programmers should work for peanuts (he doesn’t), but rather that they should be properly motivated. Call it software with a soul, if you like. Only the truly passionate need apply.

InformationWeek Weblog

As I type this there are 41 comments, and it seems like I disagree with all of them.

Perhaps the subject of a future podcast.

California State Senator introduces Stupid Legislation

I know, I know, this should come as no real surprise. California legislators craft stupid, unconstitutional legislation every day. But Kevin Murray has introduced a law which would fine or imprison anyone who “sells, offers for sale, advertises, distributes, disseminates, provides or otherwise makes available” software that allows users to connect to networks that can share files, unless that person takes “reasonable care” that the software is not used illegally.

Goodbye, Betamax Decision.

You can read some commentary from Ed Felton at Freedom To Tinker.

Lisa William’s on Blogging Policies

Lisa Williams has a terrific article on the policies and ethics which surround blogging. I’m actually most concerned with the actions of employers: the word of people being fired for the contents of their blogs frankly fills me with a bit of sadness and dread. What will the world be like if this powerful new technology for human communication is stifled by fear over your employer’s response to whatever you might write? Previously one’s employer had relatively little control over what one said, it would seem to me tragic if that freedom was lost on the verge of a communications revolution.

This seems like a good topic for a future podcast. Check out Lisa’s article though: really good stuff.

Astronaut: ‘Single-Planet Species Don’t Last’

I call bullsh*.

Shuttle astronaut John Young made the following claim:

The statistical risk of humans getting wiped out in the next 100 years due to a super volcano or asteroid or comet impact is 1 in 455. How does that relate? You’re 10 times more likely to get wiped out by a civilization-ending event in the next 100 years than you are getting killed in a commercial airline crash.’

You would think that a shuttle astronaut would know better. Let’s examine this claim in some detail, shall we? First of all, let’s assume that the particular causes mentioned (asteroid collision, super volcanoes etc) have nothing to do with human activity. It’s hard to imagine how they could be. Now, the chances of humanity surviving 100 years is 444/455 454/455. You can multiply these probabilities out, and you find that humanity had only an 8 percent chance of surviving 10000 years, and the chances of surviving one hundred thousand years is about one in 2.35E11. This works out to a 97% chance of surviving ten thousand years, an 11% chance of surviving one hundred thousand years, and only a one in thirty five million chance of surviving one million years.

Tenet calls for Internet Censor… err.. Security, That’s it!

The Washington Times files this report on a speech by former CIA Director George Tenet. Quoting:

Access to networks like the World Wide Web might need to be limited to those who can show they take security seriously, he said.

Speaking as a citizen of the Internet, I assure you I take security very seriously. It is former CIA Directors that I seem to have difficulty with.

EFF: What Peer-to-Peer Developers Need to Know about Copyright Law

Fred von Lohmann has published an interesting article on the intricacies of law surrounding the development of P2P software entitled: What Peer-to-Peer Developers Need to Know about Copyright Law. It is a good article which tries to clearly describe what direct, contributory and vicarious liability means, and how developers can potentially avoid legal pitfalls in the development of these kinds of P2P software. Given the findings in the Grokster case, it would behoove potential authors of P2P software to read and understand each of the points raised. In particular, he believes that the Betamax defense (that it is enough to show that there are substantial non-infringing uses) is under concerted attack (like the INDUCE act) and in his words:

In short, the law surrounding the Betamax defense remains in flux, putting P2P developers (and all technologists) on unpredictable legal ground.

In the end, the article concludes with 10 bits of advice for potential P2P developers.

These are steps you can take that may: (1) reduce the chance that your project will be an easy, inviting target for copyright owners; and (2) minimize the chances that your case will become the next legal precedent that content owners can use to threaten future innovators.

Worth reading, especially if you are interested in developing P2P applications.