Tuesday, December 23, 2003

Center for Consumer hood-winking

Its interesting to see how people with the opposite views from you portray you. As a progressive you can check out the "Center for Conumer Freedom". They have quite an interesting web site with a break down called activist cash of a large number of progressive activist groups, foundations and individuals. For each one there is an overview, list of motivations, financial information, connections to other organizations, news and a "black eye".

There is no doubt some, even a lot of factual truth in the information they provide, however in amongst the lists of funders, actions taken etc. is also a definite and strong marketing pitch by CCF because everything is written on the assumption these organizations are a) wrong, b) corruptted and c) acting against the interests of consumers, heck they even rail against Mothers Against Drunk Driving because: [their] original goal of going after “drunk” drivers has now been replaced by the goal of eliminating any drinking and driving.

Strangely missing from this web site is the kind of information about CCF that they provide on all other organizations. The "About Us" page merely says:

The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition supported by restaurants, food companies, and consumers working together to promote personal responsibility and protect consumer choices.
Oh. Well that's really informative. How about some more? Strangely they suggest that one has to go search for their non-profit 501(c)(3) filing to find out more. And conveniently:
Many of the companies and individuals who support the Center financially have indicated that they want anonymity as a contributor. They are reasonably apprehensive about privacy and safety, in light of the violence some activist groups have adopted as a "game plan" to impose their views.
So that stopped them from naming even one single person who is supporting them? Not one of those restaurant chains wanted to step forward and lay claim to supporting consumer freedom? Well that's a suprise isn't it!

Well I think I can probably name the #1 contributor to CCF - junk food and huge meat and food processing companies that supply them. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out given that the CCF web site is full of TV and press ads criticising efforts to encourage junk food restaurants to be more responsible about how they market the calorie loaded "meals" they sell. Predictably the CCF chase after the lawyers who are trying to bring suits against people like McDonald's, while conveniently forgetting that it took lawyers to bring down the big tabacco companies for selling cigarettes, and lawyers to bring down Goodyear for selling tyres known to be defective. Its sad that sometimes peoples own free will, and the governments legislation are powerless to have an effect on multi-billion dollar industries with their own sticky fingers stuffing wads of cash in the back pockets of government...

For the full scoop on who the CCF really is - the scoop that their "freedom" site was too afraid to publish - check out the truth about the Center for Consumer Freedom.

Wednesday, December 17, 2003

My thoughts exactly

Mark Morford, a famously outspoken columnist at SF Gate, pretty much said it all for me in todays column. Its a timely reminder of the history and both the dollar and human cost of the "military action" so far.

Open season on Diebold

When the finger was first pointed at Diebold in California they clamed they had done nothing wrong. Now its looking like open season on Diebold. One article tells of scads of illegally upgraded machines are located, incorrect procedures and non-use of correct procedures. Another tells of convicted felons in management positions at Diebold. Employees included a cocaine trafficker, a man who conducted fraudulent stock transactions and a programmer jailed for falsifying computer records. Once again Diebold claimed innocence and that all their employees had passed background checks.

Monday, December 15, 2003

The incy wincy tyrant climbed down the spider hole...

Along came the Bush and flushed the spider out.

Which is to say, the war hero pretender GWB got himself a tyrant aka Saddam Hussein. Is that a good thing? Well, its probably the most expensive and bloody arrest of an evil doer the world has ever seen. Discounting Hitler of course because he managed to kill himself before the alied posse got to him. Of course reeling in Dick Cheney for conspiring with Enron will cost us much more than the $60 billion of investments that were wiped out almost over night, and may even take longer than finding Saddam.

Along with several other people I was half suprised they didn't find Dick hiding out in the "spider hole" with Saddam. But then again, perhaps they did, which is why NeoCon Enemy #1 got out alive without a granade burn to show for it.

But aren't we forgetting something here... wasn't, and isn't, Osam bin Laden the Public Enemy #1? Isn't it the case that Hussein never meet with, worked with, or funded Osama and the only common connection between Osama and Saddam is in fact the US Government who met, aided and funded both of them at one time or another?

I guess when the bogey man is dragged out of a hole and he looks no scarier than Walter Matthau on a bad hair day (I wasn't the only one to think this) then I suppose everyone has to suspend disbelif and just praise to Jesus that George Bush saved us from him.

Sunday, December 14, 2003

No win, no fee

One of the things I noticed back in England was that all of a sudden there seem to be commercials for ambulance chasers. You know, the lawyers who flock around accident victims looking for someone to sue. One of the things Brits love to mock the Americans over is their propensity for litigation, not living in a litigious society gives Brits a sense of moral superiority. However the real reason Britain has never been a litgious society is that it was actually illegal for lawyers to work for a client on a no win no fee basis. This meant, for all intents and purposes, that only the wealthiest people could afford to sue anyone, even for really obvious things. But now it seems that changes to the law allow this and hence the commercials for ambulance chasers on TV and a marked increase in Brits looking for someone to sue.

As a Brit one of the consequences of living in the USA for ten years now is I find myself increasingly adopting a litigious attitude. I suppose its better than wanting to settle things "outside" as it were, after all the law is supposed to be there to protect those unable or unwilling to fight physically for protection. This increasing desire to find people to sue is somewhat bothersome to me, however I believe I have found a great example where a class action suit seems to just the ticket and all it is waiting for is an enterprising firm of lawyers ready to bite the bullet.

I think that there should be a class action suit for regular car owners against car companies for promoting safety of SUV class vehicles at the expense and personal risk of regular car drivers. As I've pointed out before, in a side impact of car vs SUV the car driver is six times more likely to die than in a car to car collision. The net consequence of this is that car drivers end up paying higher insurance rates than SUV owners because their cars are now statistically less safe (oh, and they die more often of course). There's some very contorted and misleading logic going on here that allows auto companies to market and promote SUVs as safer while not being required to mention the net effect on regular car drivers. Just like with the tabacco industry, I think its the kind of thing that only the fear of grave financial injury can persuade the auto companies to change their ways.

Of course while I'm on the subject it goes without saying I should mention that Detroit and Texas love SUVs because a) being essentially low tech beasts, they have much higher profit margins than regular cars, and b) they guzzle more gas than they should if some of that profit margin was pumped into building more fuel efficient SUVs. But neither of these things are ones that would probably fuel a successful class action suit - when it comes down to litigation it is only money and consumers in body bags that count.

Saturday, December 13, 2003

Deflating the American dollar Bush style

On my recent trip to Europe I came to realize just how far the mighty dollar has sunk. Since two years ago it has devalued 25% against the British Pound, and a whopping 38% against the Euro. Add to that the overall decline in USA economic health and you can see that relative to the rest of the world its quite amazing that our leaders can still hold their head up high and proclaim that everything is going to be alright.

Friday, December 12, 2003

"Death by a thousand cuts" Wal-Mart style

Sometimes the press manages to find a voice. All at once we have three articles in the LA Times (sorry no link, its subscription only), an article in the SF Chronicle and then another in Fast Company. The Fast Company article gives the best run down on how Wal-Mart affects its suppliers, the LA Times ones focus on the people effect. Either way I think they tell all you need to know to make an informed decision about whether to shop at Wal-Mart.

Except... do they?

Just try to balance in your head spending 50-100 billion dollars to aid a small nation like Iraq, with sending equal if not larger amounts to aid overseas countries by buying products from the businesses. It may seem like an unfair apples and oranges comparison but is it really? After all, when it comes down to it, wasn't the major complaint with Iraq (the undiscovered WOMD not-withstanding) that they just weren't buying our commerce based democracy. So if Wal-Mart had somehow managed to find a way to suck Iraqi businesses into their vast all encompasing supply chain do you think we would be at war with them now? Wouldn't the Wal-Mart way be a better way to get cozy with our neighbours than the US Army death-or-glory way?

Probably the biggest beef I have with the Wal-Mart effect is that they feed purely on the all American instinct for shopping and getting the best deal. But Wal-Mart shoppers typically have no idea about what goes on behind the curtain and where most of their products come from and what the consequences of embracing the If they did would they truely shop elsewhere? Do they even have any choice not to? I guess they were doing okay before Wal-Mart comes along, and briefly afterwards (as one comment about the Fast Company attests) they may find themselves continuing to spend the same or more but buying even more. Wow - more bang for my buck, isn't Wal-Mart wonderful! However eventually the supply chain squeeze and the lower wages squeeze takes effect and the downward spiral begins to set in.

And finally, all those profits (billions and billions) go into the shareholders pockets, not the workers. Ask yourself this: do you think Wal-Mart would do business with another business as big and profitable as Wal-Mart? No, it would probably tell itself its profit margins were too high and that it should go cut its profits somewhere. But what would that mean to an end of chain seller? It would mean charging lower prices (wow, even lower prices!) or paying its workers and suppliers more. So if Wal-Mart is so great why doesn't it become a profit-sharing company and handed out a signifcant amount of it profit as a dividend to its employees and shoppers - just like REI does at the end of the year. That might go some way to shovel all of that wealth it generates back into the economy and help sustain a viable shopping mass.

Wednesday, December 10, 2003

IQs still dropping sharply

As if on cue the J.D. Powers report on vehicle quality has rated the Hummer H2 dead last. As well as 225 problems per 100 vehicles it turns out that 22% of H2 owners complained about, wait for it.... low gas mileage. Apparently H2 owners are not happy about having to refuel every 200 miles when zipping up and down the freeway in their off-road tanks. Interestingly Hummer has blamed it on a marketing problem instead of buyer stupidity. But it was a cunning exploitation of loopholes that permited Hummer to market the H2 without quoting gas mileage in the first place. It seems unlikely that they will dash to show rooms to brag about the soul and gas sucking mileage of the H2.

I expect with their unique all American know-how the people at Hummer will figure out the best way to solve the gas mileage problem is to simply put in a forty gallon tank. Stupid is, stupid does...

Random notes from the long dark tea-time overseas

As promised here is a list (possibly quite long) of random stuff that occured to me during the two weeks I spent in England.

  • A letter to AdBusters has suggested guerilla tactic of putting "Out of Order" signs on vending machines, especially those selling high sugar drinks. This little piece of social engineering is apparently very successful since no-one no matter how thirsty wants to shovel coins into a machine that will probably eat their money instead of dispensing sugary beverages.
  • When departing for England I got to the airport a good two hours ahead of time like they always tell you to. Of course walking into the International Terminal at SFO I encountered a vast an empty wasteland of checkin desks. Unfortunately as I rounded the corner right at the end of the cavenous hall it turned out that Virgin had a huge line (although not as long as this line) I in front of it. The cause was apparently "our computers are not talking to the ticket printing computers" i.e. someone probably screwed up a network router somewhere. Consequently all tickets were being, shock-horror, hand written! And this was the cause of the monumental delay. I waited in line for an hour and probably would not have made it onto the plane if the computer problem hadn't been fixed after about 45 minutes. As it was I then had to wait another thirty minutes in the security line to take off my shoes and belt and watch and jacket and hat but not my pants... and by the time I got to the gate it was already boarding and there was no time for duty free, a snack or anything like that. Oh well, as they say - "expect the unexpected".
  • Having got the front of the aforementioned checkin line I was staggered when a Virgin employee came up to me and tried to sell me a bulkhead seat upgrade for $75. And that was just for one way... The tried it coming back to - the total would have been $150 or only slightly less than my entrie ticket cost. I was amazed that they are trying this kind of trick, I really didn't expect it from Virgin. After all on a 747 if you have a bulkhead seat you are likely to end up right next to the loos and face hordes of people (like me) milling around for eight hours trying to ward off deep vein thrombosis.
  • While on the plane I read something to the about Visa that just blew my mind. If you're a regular reader you'll know how the US national debt (that's debt, not deficit) is something like $7 trillion, or over $80,000 per family. Well apparently the folks at Visa (credit cards) handled transactions totally a stunning $362.4 trillion last year. But the really incredible thing is they only have a few thousand employees worldwide. So do the math - they cream of 2-3% (or maybe more) from each transaction which makes something like $6 trillion just from shoveling money around each year. They surely must have the highest revenue per employee of any company worldwide??? Next time you're wondering why credit card companies aren't worried by billions of dollars in credit card fraud you shouldn't be surprised, its a drop in the ocean compared to how much money they are making. And note, this figure doesn't include MasterCard, Amex and all those other smaller credit companies.
  • Of late I've found myself having more and more convesations with people about why mega-corporations like Wal-Mart and the like are bad for pretty much everyone except the executives running them and perhaps the shareholders who profit from their profits. The latest development seems to be that the UK supermarket chain Asda is now owned by Wal*Mart which lead to my sister-in-law asking me the leading question "So what's so bad about WalMart then?". This gave me an excellent opportunity to give her a run down on the apauling employee relations record of WalMart, their battle against unions, their terrible record on treatment of injured employees, and the very unpleasent anti-competive business practices the engage in with their suppliers. WalMart employs a staggering 900,000 people in the USA and 1.4 million worldwide so statistically most Americans know someone who works at or worked at WalMart. I do. Last year they made a net profit of $8 billion or almost $6000 per employee. Unfortunately most WalMart employees are languishing on minimum wage taking home a whopping $5-6 an hour and almost none of them have the benefit of full-time employment rights because the managers cunningly keeps their hours below the amount where they would qualify as full time employees. So in the end the only good thing about WalMart is the low prices and profit for shareholders (or if you're an executive the millions of dollars in compensation). Unfortunately the cost of communities that embrace WalMarts low prices as a god-send is undoubtedly a net negative when all factors are considered. They are just another example of a huge corporation siphoning billions of dollars out of our communities and redistributing to the top few percent that have no need for food stamps and working two or three jobs just to make ends meet.
  • While in Europe I got a much more balanced view of the world. Yes American issues are reported in the news, almost every day on the TV and certainly every day in the papers. However, even when accounting for the bias towards local stories you get a much greater balance between American, European, Asian and news from the rest of the world Indeed given that the European Union now has a larger population than the USA, and both India and China have populations of over one billion its a wonder how long the USA can maintain its empire building streak before collapsing into obscurity like the UK, France, Spain, Russia, and all those other empire wannabes did in previous centuries. The USA has long been lauded as the poster child of efficiency but recent figures are starting to suggest that Europe, with all it advantages of a superior standard of living is getting very close to current US efficiency standard. And there may even be reason to believe that much of Americans economic growth has been bolstered significantly by increases in efficiency at the expense of living standards vs. adopting inherently more efficient systems.
  • I read an article on how Vietnamese catfish farmers realized that opening of trade borders meant they could sell their catfish into the USA and vastly undercut local suppliers. As they began to corner the market the USA catfish farmers retaliated and forced the Vietnames fish to be sold under a different name. While both fish were technically "catfish" the Vietnamese were of a different species than those farmed in the USA. This opened the door for the FDA to rule that only US catfish could be sold as "catfish". To add insult to injury the ITC then decided that the USA could levy a stiff tariff to ensure even the relabled product could not undercut the local product. This to me is yet another fine example of how globalization is okay just so long as a US company is in the chain somewhere to milk some cash out of the newly created international trade. Just how long will it be before India and China finally wake and realize that the WTO and GATT treaties with the USA are only useful if an American corporation is in the chain somewhere to suck up a tidy profit from the cross border trade. After all, if some overseas sneaker company started successfully selling its locally produced product in the USA just how long do you think it would be before Nike was calling for trade tariffs against them?
  • Finally my hat goes off to Roy Disney who's resignation letter pointed out that Disney is now perceived as a company that
    "is rapacious, soul-less, and always looking for the "quick buck" rather than the long-term value which is leading to a loss of public trust."
    Well tar and feather me and roll me down the Matterhorn but surely truer words could not have been spoken? Couldn't he have been speaking about almost any Fortune 500 company? Of course Roy Disney will now be ostricised and marginalized as some freak of the excutive world who "just didn't get it" but I think he "got it" exactly. For years now that confounded Disney mouse has caused a very negative reaction in me, not disimilar to that exhibited by Cayce Pollard in William Gibson's "Pattern Recognition". It has nothing whatsoever to do with an aversion for mice, but entirely about Disney selling its soul somewhere along the line to become an icon of all that is bland, phoney and exploitative in America. So that said, if I ever meet Roy Disney I'd certainly shake his hand and buy him a drink for saying what was really on his mind..

Once more unto the Tea-Time

If you didn't know already I have recently returned from a trip to the Mother Country where I spent two weeks doing little else except drink tea. Its such a pastime over there I had forgotten how it was to drink a half dozen or so cups of the stuff in one day. So you would think such a trip would surely have me bursting with things to blog about, well it has but somehow I haven't managed to until today.

In the end I started to get tired of hearing "When are you going to blog again?", to the point where I've started to wonder about it myself. While I have managed a few quips over on JohnnyTheo none of my copious notes made while on the road have made it into digital print. In the end I think it was the shear volume of notes, and the loss of immediacy that killed the urge to put fingers to keyboard. I really should have just written the entries in full there and then, and done a copy and paste when I got back. As a solution I think I'm just going to dump my notes into the next entry and get back to the normal programme...

Friday, November 14, 2003

The devil is in the operating system... maybe

Over the past week I've been several calls or messages a day from a friend who has been trying to figure out why his laptop takes forever to startup. The calls range from excited "I've found it" type messages to depressed resignation to the fact that "it" whatever it may be, will never be found. Apparently the laptop didn't use to behave this way so as the resident PC expert in his life we suspected anything from a configuration problem, virus to spyware. Either way, to the uninformed one might conclude his laptop is possessed by some nasty daemon. Now this guy is not a computer neophyte, he's written an real-time operating system, debugged embedded systems with his bare hands, and been a CTO of a multi-billion dollar company. But somewhere along the line he resigned from his duty of keeping up to date with the details of computer maintenance and that just about coincided with Microsoft Windows becoming the prevalent desktop platform.

So in the past week I've given him the low down on his registry, where all the startup program hide and how to use 'msconfig' or 'regedit'. I've given him Norton System Works (tip buy: last years version from eBay, a snip at $6 or less!) to clean up his invalid registry entries and remove IE plugins and ActiveX cruft, Ad-Aware to scan for spyware, and pointed him to Sandra 2004 to check all his system hardware configuration. Giving remote assistance its a slow process, you know how it is trying to get an exact explanation of the "all I did was" or "I didn't change anything" scenarios that inevitbly preceed dire straits. To date we've removed a lot of redundant cruft, and found one spyware program NewDotNet which was something particularly incidious lurking in his network stack that even I hadn't heard of yet. I guess I should have, however I tend to stay well away from programs that contain any spyware - its been a couple of years now since I fell victim to anything like that.

However, as far as I know, the truth is still out there and the laptop is still misbehaving. I'm hoping to avoid a "laying on of hands" session - if I'm lucky I'll depart on my vacation before that becomes necessary. I know this guy has probably spent the best part of 20 to 40 hours on this problem now and I'm about ready to recommend he back up the personal data and reinstall the OS, or at least try a system repair.

In the mean time I'm reminded that unauthorized modifications to the system code is one of the things that the next major version of Windows aka "Longhorn" is supposed to cure once and for all. Apparently much maligned data protection features that are being built in at the hardware level will also be turned to protect the operating system itself from modification. The use of data protection for enforcing copyright protection is highly contentious - it seems, that like on the freeway, everyone wants to be free to break the law even though they know its illegal to do so. Maybe that is just part of freedom - freedom to transgress the rules of society for whatever reason and freedom to experience the loss of freedom. However using data protection to protect the neophyte, or not so neophyte computer user from having to think about viruses and spyware is an emminently sensible thing to do. I'm not entirely sure how the protection of the OS from viruses and the like will work - if a program wants to install and pops up the classic license dialog with some disclaimer in 1point text way down at the bottom, how is the OS supposed to differentiate legitimate user approved installations of software from installation of spyware or other updates of drivers etc.?

Maybe future versions of Windows will, by default, be configured in such a way that only software digitally signed by Microsoft can be installed. After my last week of experience I'm begining to wonder if this isn't such a bad idea. For a certain class of computer users I'm sure there is a very strong case to be made for having the computer pre-configured and permanently locked in a mode where system maintenance, including installing programs can only be done remotely by a Microsoft support person or agent. This might actually save a bundle of cash on calls from people who went in and deleted half their system files, or messed with the registry or something like that. These things can be painfully slow to diagnose and debug and its probably just better to never let people get into this mess in the first place. So what about freedom? Well sometimes you've gotta earn freedom or pay a price to keep it. In this case I think 95% of computer users really don't need the freedom to install anything but approved off the shelf packages and should be given a discount for enduring blissful ignorance of the world of pain that awaits them once they start installing at will all the random junk that is lurking out their on the Internet. One benefit of having such a system could be that a higher degree of accountability could then be placed on software vendors for damage their software may cause. After installing a certain package the system becomes "unstable" its much easier to point the blame and seek recompense or at the very least remedial action. A company could no longer shirk its responsiblity and blame viruses or some other user action for the problems.

In the mean time I wont hold my breath waiting for Longhorn, and I'll continue to swaddle myself with anti-virus protection, firewalls, and the usual armoury of system utilities that are necessary to keep clean and free in the age of Internet Enlightenment.

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

Unsung superheros: Knee Defender!

I've often contemplated how useful defensive tactics against compulsive airline seat recliners would be. Unfortunately I never thought about it until after the seat slammed down into my knees. What I found most interesting was that in business class its even worse - the seats recline so far if you are sitting by the window you have to crawl over your neighbors lap to escape. However my favourite superhero Knee Defender comes to the rescue! As with the best in ventions its small, disarmingly simple and cheap. I love their little courtesy card to explain the predicament to the passenger in front.

Now all I'm waiting for is the Back Defender that prevents the annoying little oik behind you from kicking your seat compulsively.

Tuesday, November 11, 2003

The fundamental interconnectedness of being

With a blog named "The long dark tea-time of the soul" you'd expect me to believe in the fundamental interconnectedness of things. However it never ceases to amaze me when life really does appear to be fundamentally interconnected. Tonight I went to a Bay Area development planning meeting in San Francisco. Its one of those things that until a few months ago I would never have considered attending. But thats where you end up when you start taking an interesting in your own neighborhood and wondering just who is making all the important decisions and why.

So I'm riding the elevator to the 26th floor of some non-descript downtown skyscraper late at night and I think "wow, this is just like in that Josh Kornbluth movie, 'Haiku Tunnel' when Josh is skulking around some downtown skyscrapers late at night trying to post those letters... " I sit through the five hour planning meeting watching a bunch of planning commissions make decisions about how the city will be developed. At 11:30pm I get out of the meeting - five hours without food, drink or coffee (do I qualify for Survivor yet?) - and I take BART back home. Then as I get off BART at West Oakland I bump into an old friend of my girlfriend whom I haven't seen in over a year or more, and who just got laid off from Salon Magazine and hence is just about to leave town for Los Angeles. So it was probably just the last chance I would ever have of bumping into her and certainly the last opportunity to invite her to come to my girlfriends Art Exhibition (shameless plug). Even more bizarrely she just happened to know my travelling companion from the days when he worked from the City of Oakland.

Then I go home and I decide on a whim to listen to my voice mail that's been piling up and my friend is complaining about some 5Mb email he's been jamming up my mail servers with. So I go checking my server logs and there I notice that Josh Kornbluth was trying to send me an email today but failed because I'd retired my old email address due to too much spam. I send Josh some email telling him my new email address and he gets right back to me almost immediately and from his reply I find out Josh just started his own blog about taxation this week. So I'm posting a comment about taxation of The Rolling Stones on his blog when I think: "Wait a minute - wasn't I thinking about Josh earlier this evening riding the elevator to the meeting in 50 California?"

And just then I realized I knew what I would blog about this evening.

Friday, November 07, 2003

So IQs did drop sharply

Following my previous post about Diebolds "disconcerting" news I'd like to publicly question the intelligence of those in Alameda County who bought their system. Apparently the fact that Diebold had applied an unauthorized (and uncertified) patch to their voting machines was not detected until an audit done after the most recent election.

What amazes me is that anyone buying an electronic voting system could allow one where the manufacturer could apply a code patch without this being a) detected and b) rejected before voting commenced. Just how hard is it for the voting system to require an independent verification that the code being executed is that which was certified? If the checksum of the code being executed doesn't match that of the code certified the machine should be not be usable for voting. Period.

Sigh.

The Bellevue Bounty Hunters

I found it amusing that Microsoft is now offering two $250k rewards to anyone who can deliver recent virus auhors. Such bounty hunter tactics may get a lot of press but I have my doubts about how successful they will ever be (remember the $25M bounty on Saddam?).

Based on the estimated economic damage done by viruses and worms I don't think it will be long before someone is offering the following counter bounties to capture various big business evil-doers:

  • $1 billion for the person who added support for VB script attachments in Outlook
  • $1 billion for each person who did an unchecked copy of data to a buffer
  • $1 billion for the person who, after adding all the security to WinXP decided the default install should disable most of it
  • $1 billion plus tar and feathering for the person who decided to market Oracle's database as "unbreakable" only to have it hacked on the launch day

Wednesday, November 05, 2003

The Hitchens vs. Danner Smackdown Part II

I just finished watching the second Hitchens vs. Danner debate, click here to do so for yourself. I watched the first one in person before the war and it was interesting to hear if opinions had changed.

For those that don't know Christopher Hitchens is a very bright intellectual with a ton of facts at his finger tips. He's been studying and writing about politicts, foreign policy and all kinds of things for a long time. He even wrote a book on Mother Teresa and frequently manages quick and witty come backs. Of Hitchens, one of my friends said "He's just too clever for his own good" and thats because he can present such well reasoned arguments you'll find yourself following and believing his train of thought until at once you realize you completely disagree with his conclusion. Then you feel tricked and apt to not trust his arguments any more. Danner is also intelligent and well read, written and traveled. However Danner does not present that "snobbish intellectual" front that Hitchens sometimes does.

So basically it went exactly the way I thought. Hitchens still saying "it was justified - we had to do it" and Danner saying "Its a huge mess, I told you so and the US government is going to have a really hard, if not impossible time fixing it".

Danner spared Hitchens the embarasement of reminding him of his predictions of a very quick shock and awe victory followed in quick succession by democracy. It would be interesting to go back and listen to the original debate.

My conclusions are:

  • a) I don't believe Hitchens premise that this was the only route the USA could take, and that they had to take it.
  • b) I believe Danner's statements on how dangerous it is right now, and how hopeless the USA's efforts to restore relative safety are.
  • c) Pulling out is not an option and because of b) there will be a protracted, very bloody and very expensive military occupation of Iraq.
  • d) Even if the government sticks with it, the American people will tire of the cost of keeping, or trying to keep peace in Iraq long before the government does. This will probably lead to some very unfortunate consequences.
  • e) I just don't buy Hitchens assertion that the American people are safer now than they were. The escalation of hatred towards the USA and the race to acquire nuclear arms by small nations are very concrete indications that big stick policies don't work. You reap what you sow...
  • f) The palpable deception of the American people over pretty much every fact relating to this invasion was disgusting and I didn't even hear Hitchens say "yes, but it was necessary". It has only helped to bring the American government into ill-repute.

I have thought all along that the USA should have been using its power to enforce the UN as a just and reliable enforcer of world peace and router of tyrants who cause genocide and commit other crimes against humanity. However it is clear to me that only the "eye for an eye" tactic for "peace keeping" is currently in vogue. Unfortunately we know from so many, many conflict situations around the world that tit-for-tat violence leads nowhere but a bloody spiral down...

The people of Iraq deserve better. Saddam was an evil saddistic tyrant, but he's still out there and many immitators have rushed in to fill the void. No, I didn't have any great plan to get him out of power and to stop the blood letting at home. But I would have found a compromise to get UN backing and support, and I would have been upfront with the true cost and arrange for a large enough force and sufficient forward planning to make the road to stability, peace and independence again a smoother one.

But ultimately is the USA or even the combined efforts of the UN even in a position to consider such benevolance towards every country that is suffering under the remaining tyrants of the world? Their efforts in Afghanistan clearly show that UN involvement alone is not sufficient and that billions of dollars does not even come close to the true cost of peace. If we want to buy peace for every country that threatens us or does not meet up to our expectatins of democracy imagine that it will be tens if not hundreds of trillions of dollars that are required. and will peace that is bought ever be lasting? Somehow I doubt it. There are probably easier but much slower ways to achieve world peace. They may require patience, diplomacy and nerves of steel. But witness the crumbling of the Soviet Union as a case in point. Or the brokered peace in Northern Ireland.

Right now America is clearly following a foreign policy that is threatening, ambiguous and dangerous around the world. People asked "why do they hate us?" after 9/11, and I'm sure a great number of people still ask themselves that question. I don't think we'll ever be able to rest easy at home until the majority of Americans understand why agressive, preemptive, unilateral foreign policies are the touchstone of resentment and hatred. Unfortunately that may be a long time coming for America and the world as a whole, we only have to look at our internal situation to realize that. But that's a whole different story...

From his own mouth

"Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."
Brent Scowcroft and George H. W. Bush's A World Transformed (1998).

Diebold's "disconcerting" digital deception

I can't say I'm at all surprised to read today that Diebold has been accused of installing uncertified software on their voting machines, and this time by the California Assistant Secretary of State no less. Diebold officials "seemed surprised" - I don't blame them. After every warning about the dubious security of Diebold systems and their practices had been ignored across the country I guess they thought they were home free to do whatever they want with our voting system.

For an external view of what other countries think of some of Diebold's "features" you should read about how one Australian company approached developing an e-voting system. In their system public exposure of the source code is part of the software development process, and not just a flaw in the secrecy used to protect otherwise unknown software code. Most people are starting to inherently doubt any claim of security based on secrecy within a collection of people who's trustworthyness is largely based on financial reward. After all if your trustworthiness is based on money then it stands to reason when the price is right secrets always have a way of leaking into untrustworthy hands. As the saying goes "money talks".

For me, I'll continue to trust Diebold voting systems about as far as I could throw one. Which, by the looks of things isn't going to be very far.

Tuesday, November 04, 2003

Is there light at the end of the tea-time?

I'm not sure if it was the happy ending of "28 days later" (which I just watched), the thought of returning to England for a bit of R&R, the mental release following yet another meaningless product release cycle at work, or what?. Whatever it is I'm left feeling strangely ebullient that things aren't as bad as they sometimes seem, or at least as I portray them in this blog. Looking back at some previous tea-time entries I can see that sometimes I imply the world is a very dark, dark place indeed. Yes, there's even a certain amount of rage in my writings, not of the "28 days later" kind though, more like outrage. But mostly there's a lot of frustration, frustration that the big changes in the world I'd like to see in my life time are never going to happen. There will still be people labeled as terrorists and people waging wars on them, there will still be pollution, the earth will still be warming, vast numbers of people will still be living in poverty and people will still be dying after living unspeakably miserable lives.

Yes, its depressing and awful to contemplate, its even enough to make you want to scream and shout, protest in the streets, or just plain give up. Maybe in 100 years, or 200 years or 500 years things will have change. My 25th Century counterpart may even extract my blog from archaic printed historical documents and contemplate how awful, primative and barbaric 21st Century life was just as I do when reading about genocide in 1492. However its our phenomenal fortune to placed in a position to contemplate our lot in life. To see with great perspective from whence the human race has come and to realize that while there is only one past, that there are many possible futures. We can see that even if there are unlikely to be many giant leaps "for mankind" in our lifetimes, there will be many small steps to be made. Every journey begins with one step and, if it reaches an end at all, is a journey of continuous steps all the way in between.

Monday, November 03, 2003

This isn't going to hurt very much...

To follow up my identity post I managed to procure some digital identity certificates over the weekend. It wasn't really that painful, but I will tell you it wasn't that straight forward either. I pride myself with being somewhat of a geek and actually know the difference between symmetric and asymmetric encryption systems and have a clue how things like SSL and digital certificates work. But I think I now know why the average price of an SSL certificate is well over $100 and not $10 or less. Its because the average customer purchasing one will need some serious handholding, and we're not talking about the kind of handholding that's in "Cliffhanger" either. It also assumes the average purchaser is a reasonably tech savvy IT person and not just a John or Jane Doe who wouldn't know their security certifcate from their 100-yard breaststroke certificate.

So after my experience this weekend, and having spent most of today resolving issues with actually installing said certificates, not to mention the issue of expense, I find myself wondering just what chance there ever is of the average person being able to adopt and use digital certificates for anything as mundane as sending email. Right now I'd put it at close to nil.

Sunday, November 02, 2003

And those were the good old days?

On my bedside table at the moment is Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States : 1492-Present. It was recommended to me about a year ago but it took a trip to a book signing before this book fell into my hands. You see I made the mistake of turning up at a book signing (for another book) with my own copy of the book and see the eyes of the book store people on me as I left I felt a guilt paign and decided I should be some other book. Howard Zinn's work was the only one that stood out as being something I really wanted to read.

Those who have read "A People's History" could probably guess how I'm feeling right now, especially from the title of this entry. Those who have not read it should pick up a copy and dive in, its quite a page turner. Of course Zinn doesn't proclaim to offer a "balanced" view of history in his book, as many have pointed out, history is written by the winners. So Zinn has shamelessly written from the perspective of the losers throughout history - the people. Hence the title. So when others choose to celebrate Columbus and extol his great navigational skills (a mere 33 days at sea - significantly less spectacular than the pacific navigators who colonized the Polynesian islands), Zinn choose to extol his consumate skill for genocide. Yes, it is well documented that Columbus was the first to wipe of the native people of the Bahamas and what is now called Cuba. Hundreds of thousands, if not a million or more were simply exterminated in cruel and horrific circumstances.

And so it goes on. As late as the mid-1700s people were legally being "burned alive over a slow fire" for trying to escape their slave masters. The peoples history told in this book is clearly one that gives the picture from the short and pointy end of the stick otherwise known as "progress" or "civilization". I'm only a few chapters into it so far but I can tell things wont be getting any better between Columbus' first genocidal forays into the West Indies, and the contemporary events of George W. Bush's "war on terrorism". So next time someone tells you "those were the good old days" you should ask them, or yourself, just whose perspective that sentiment is coming from.

Friday, October 31, 2003

Fear not

I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear - from Frank Herbert's Dune.

Thursday, October 30, 2003

In search of Utopia

Or: Just who are you anyway and does it really matter?

Warning: this is certainly very long and could easily be very boring!

My true identity is quite easily discovered, yet to the casual reader of this blog I remain, respectively, "Blog Gently". However I believe my identity is more than my name, date of birth, phone number, social security number or any other random selection of vital credentials an inquistor requests from me. Indeed I believe my identity transcends beyond what I look like, my finger prints, retinal scan or DNA sample. Most people, when pressed would probably agree. The "I" of the minds eye is inside us. Our unique experiences, our behaviour, and reactions are the very stuff that makes us different from anyone else who happens to look like us and have a collection of fake IDs proclaiming they are us. That is probably why some of the most difficult human conditions to deal with are mental disorders that leave a person responding in a markedly different manner from before, or suffering some significant memory loss. If I were to suffer such a condition I might not even realize it myself, and from the outside my physical identity would be unchanged. All DNA, fingerprint or other tests would still identify me as me, yet for people who knew me, there would no longer be any me there at all. Would I still be "me"? To be honest I don't even know how to answer that question - for many legal purposes (my citizenship of a country) I would, for some (power of attorney) I might not.

So I perceive identity as constant puzzle of the human condition. In the absence of, or degradation of, a persons mental responses, one is left to rely on the physical condition, and yet in so many instances a mere mental response - that of reciting four digits of ones social security number, or a date of birth - is taken to suffice for ones identity. Any interloper searching through trash, on the Internet, or any person with $25 can now impersonate that mental response. Hence the puzzle - why are people so afraid of any attempts to identity systems? I genuinely believe that had the framers of the US Constitution (bless them, those venerable ancestors of todays stupid white men) lived in modern times they would probably seek to tack onto the Bill of Rights, the right to identity and the right to anonymity. Yes we already have the right to privacy in our own homes, and the right to free speech, but no actual constitutionally blessed right to anonymity nor to have a mechanism to prove our identity. The problem is that ultimately both of these are enshrined in technological solutions which are as yet imperfect, and may ultimately be unatainable

I am reminded of this because of Dave's comments on the US Mail's plan to require bulk mailers to attach a valid from address on all their mail. Is this, we ask ourselves, the first dangerous millimeter down that slippery slope towards complete loss of our right to privacy and free speech? I do not blame such fears, I have them myself. But I also do not believe that the US Mail, nor its employees have any obligation to carry any anthrax laden package, death threat or kindly gift from another Unabomber wannabe to its inevitable destination. It is true that a letter, suitably transcribed and dispatched casually in a remote mail box, is the classic medium of free speech combined with right to privacy i.e. an anonymous sharing of information. To require the identity of the sender of all postal items to be verified would deprive the public of such a medium.

Perhaps some limitation - only letters could be sent with unverified identity - would aleviate the problem? But what about that tainted envelope containing just a dash of anthrax or some new neural agent that will kill its recipient on handling? Does one just write that off as a price to pay for anonymity and free speech by mail? Or do we just abandon all hope of anonymity by mail and let the information find its way by other means. After all when it comes down to it, verifying the identity of a sender is just a flawed as the schemes used to identity people in the first place. Anyone who truely wanted to send information anonymously would just find a fake ID of some happless John Doe and use that. This is of course a common ruse in use today by many email spammers.

Which brings me on to my original point - my identity. As I pointed out, all current commonly used systems of identity have their flaws. DNA doesn't work for identical twins but works for the remaining 99.6% of us. However anyone who has seen the movie "Gattaca" can imagine that most non-rigorously applied DNA tests could be defeated and provide a fake DNA identification for anyone. The same applies to fingerprints because current scanners can easily be defeated by fake prints, or genuine fingerprints could be destroyed or lost via amputation. Ditto for retinal scans. I myself have suffered changes to my retinal pattern from a viral infection and later on from contact lens abuse. If a damaged or lost eye (I've known blind people with no eyes at all) were to invalidate your identity it would not be a very good system at all. Once again, if you watched the movie "Demolition Man" would could easily imagine some retinal scan identities could be faked in some rather unpleasent ways. So whats it to be? Will we be expected to submit to barage of physical identificaiton systems everytime we want to mail a letter and then wait to have experts on hand to study results and pass judgement if anything should not match up? What if something goes wrong and they say we are no longer who we say we are?

There are just so many problems associated with identity. One could suggest that perhaps varying degrees of identificaiton works. The rigour with which our identity is probed could depend on the situation. But wouldn't a very common occurance, like getting on an airplane, warrant very strict identity checks? When people risk their lives based on the positive identificaiton on others shouldn't they expect the very highest of standards to apply? Thus I find it amazing that systems for "expidited transit" through airline security checks are gaining popularity as a valid solution to "long delays" at airport security checks. Personally I'd rather be on a plane with only the people who stood in the long line than on the plane that also had people with the "known good guy" ID. I'm reminded of how many non-concealment schemes to carry illegal items through security checks usually revolve around exploitation of a happless stooge who wont be subject to normal security measures, or is less likely to get "profiled". Or have your evil-doer just pretend to be such a person - dress them in a flight attendant uniform, give them an easily faked "good doer" ID and whatch them whisked through security. This is simlar to "evil doers" exploting, perhaps under duress, a identifiable "good doer" to do their bidding. For example the scenario of bank manager with wife and kids kidnapped and told he has to unlock a safe to secure their release. You see, even provable identity does not buy us freedom from security risks.

Well then, maybe mental identification schemes would work, how about a rigorous challenge response scheme for instance? These are commonly used by banks when they ask you questions about your financial activity. My experience is they are as fallible as we. I once was unable to access my account because I couldn't accurately answer several questions about my bank balances, and recent deposits and withdrawals - this was inspite of all the physical identity proofs they had requested. Also who is to be the guardian of such information, these shared secrets, and who is to say that someone who had gained such information illegally or by other legal means could not more easily pass such a test than myself? After all if you really dug into my public records you could easily find many trivia that I have long since forgotten but might be used to give a compelling impersonation of me. Indeed this is the basis of many a confidence trick where the trickster pretends to be someone by going back to distant school day memories and relying on the victims unwillingness to admit to a poor memory for faces or names.

Eventually I'm lead to wonder if identity and anonymity are really the holy grails some people perceive them to be. In a modern society that has become fixated over perceived security issues related to proof of identity I believe what is really of prime importance is proof of truthfulness. In the end requests to prove identity are usually hand in hand with some transaction that has certain constraints. Does it really matter who is buying our house if they will fullfil the contract to pay us? Does it matter who is living next door to us if they pay their taxes and never do us any harm? Or consider the converse - perhaps there is person previously convicted of a terrorist act on our plane, but if we know he has no intent to blow it up or crash it into a building do we care? If the person we are considering employing has done five years in federal penitentiary should we discriminate against them if they are now entirely trustworthy, more so than the applicant without a record who is fully intending to rip us off? What assurance do we have that any proof of identity carries with it any assurance we can trust the bearer? For the most part, none at all! Trust is always derived by other means quite separate from regular proofs of identity and should be treated in via a quite different mechanism. For example: if the person dropping an anonymous piece of mail into the mailbox can certify they are doing no harm to the mail carrier or the recipient then why should we care to identity them in the first place?

Ultimately I believe, in my utopia, the perfect mechanism to assert truthfulness is more important than any for proof of identity. For those interested in an exploration of life with such a mechanism you might read the novel The Truth Machine. Many of the significant consequences on society are played out in this book, and for a while it does seem like utopia indeed. Of course there is a catch (it being a novel rather than a straight intellectual exploration of the future) so as ever the finale reminds us that the search for utopia (of which I am often accused) is the same as the search for perfection: without the latter one just hasn't reached the former. But can one ever trust a proof of perfection and will everyone ultimately just have to trust and believe in something they can never prove?

Monday, October 27, 2003

Viral marketing: the antidote

Miss Me tells the story of yet another viral marketing scam. Ditzy gals in a bar dupe gulible guys into beliving the latest bottled water product leaves them feeling "so great, so real". Ah that would be "so real" as opposed to "surreal" I guess.

Most of us have heard about it by now, that inciduous consumer brain washing scam called "Viral Marketing". One of the proponents of viral marketing is Big Fat Worldwide Inc. who say "we infuse brands into the target's life without disrupting their everyday, normal behavior." The logical conclusion of viral marketing is that no one will express any opinion about a product without expecting to get paid for it, and everyone will express any opinion if paid for it. There will be no independent trusted third party information to be had on products, only paid for viralmercials. Most web sites that allow free input of consumer product opinions have experienced this problem. Sooner or later a site gets large enough that paid shills start posting bogus AAA+++ reviews, genuine reviews start migrating to the next web site and before the credibility of the entire site is drained to zero.

So what is the antidote? Viral anti-marketing. The target host will recognize the attacking viral agent and produce antibodies. The antibodies will "identify viral agents, expose them, surround them and disable their viral messaging mechanisms rendering them harmless". The antibodies are of course us, that is those of us that have woken up to the reality of walking, talking billboards penetrating our social environment. We willl be trained in the art of viral marketing agent recognition and go about our business of routing out the phoney consumers. At such time we will summons any adjacent antibodies and start loud conversations about how much the product sucks, or how many pounds they gained from drinking said sugared beverage, or what a big rip-off paying $3 a bottle for flavoured water is when a $12 purifier will give you a 1000 gallons of tasty beverage straight from the tap.

However I suspect that deep in the bowels of consumer exploitation land, sick and twisted minds have already dreamed up paid-for viral anti-marketing. Companies are, as I write, no doubt sending out paid viral anti-marketing agents to attempt to counter attack the viral messages from their competitors. Its only a matter of time before the first viral marketing vs. viral anti-marketing agent fight breaks out. So the next time you hear two loud-talking beautiful people asserting how their water has left them feeling "so great, so real", get ready to duck because the sugared soda water company agents may just be lurking in the corner ready for the kill.

Sunday, October 26, 2003

Its no murder mystery

Last week Oakland chalked up its 100th murder for 2003. Alphonso Jose Carbajal, 29 was found shot in the head on the morning of October 20th and was pronounced dead shortly afterward. I'm sorry to say this comes as no shock to me, I've always known that Oakland has one of the highest homicide rates in the country and I've lived here for over nine years now. For a city with a population of 400,000 we'll end the year with a homicide rate of over five times the USA national average (5.5 homicides per 100,000 in Y2K).

As I noted in a previous blog entry the USA national average is already several times that of most European countries, and almost ten times that of Japan. That means Oakland is running at twenty times the homicide rate of the United Kingdom, or fifty times that of Japan. According to OECD figures the United Kingdom and the United States have approximately the same number of police per capita (around 240 per 100,000) so why the huge difference in homicide rates? And within the USA why the huge variation? After all isn't Oakland situated within the Bay Area, one of the most affluent regions of all the United States? Oakland has around 800 police (778 in 2002), which is 20% under the national average, but still not massively so. In Japan they make do with almost half the number of police per capita of Europe and the USA so you can't just blame it on lack of police.

Sitting here in the safest district of Oakland I can hear what must be the dozenth set of police sirens this evening. Its a warm night and I'm sure people are out on the streets enjoying it. Sadly the odds are another two people will have died by then end of the weekend. I'm not going to pretend I have the answers. But I do find it shocking as ever, that one can live in one of the wealthiest area of the nation and find oneself slap bang in the middle of one of the most dangerous cities in the nation. I believe it goes to show that some things are very out of balance in this country and that a concentration of wealth certainly does not inherently lead to any answers. Crime will follow the money and the follow the opportunity to redistribute wealth and benefits down the food chain from were they have been vacuumed in vast quantities for the last 30 years.

Monday, October 20, 2003

Airline economics for dummies

Apparently Concorde needed one ton of fuel per passenger, that's about 2,000 pounds of fuel. A 747 takes one-quarter that amount, so 500 pounds of fuel. I will soon be making a round trip to England by 747 so that will be 1,000 pounds of fuel burned to haul me there and back. Total cost of ticket exluding taxes: $270. By my calculation a thousand pounds of fuel is about 100 gallons so I'm buying 100 gallons of aviation fuel, plus paying for all the rest of the airline infrastructure costs, employee salary, food (okay, thats about $1 worth) etc. etc. Its easy to see how airlines are barely making a profit at this price. I guess I'm just along for a cheap ride with the 1st and Business class people who are paying the bulk of the cost.

Sunday, October 19, 2003

All these words on the web, lost like tears in the rain?

Given the propensity for the collective masses of "the internet" to pour their hearts out in digital form alone, I am led to wondering just how long they will survive after they are published? We are all familiar with "404 Not Found" errors that signify another website bit the dust. On occassion their content can be recovered via the great Google cache in the sky, or The Way Back Machine at archive.org. Other times the content just never made it into any semblance of semi-persistance. For instance this blog does not appear on archive.org because it is bound to an IP address that is shared with other domains and The Way Back Machine appears only to hit individual IPs and not registered domains. Even though available IP addresses probably outnumber registered domains by about 100 to 1 it seems a large percentage of web sites and hence content will still slip through the cracks of archival like this one.

Even if my site were to end up archived by one of these remote data suckers, what is to say that the archived data will ever survive for any significant period of time? While, as I have previously noted, the cost of hard drive storage capacity is still dropping precipitously, there is still no guarantee anyone will have the interest or money to continue to archive new web content or preserve old, no longer valid content. Furthermore, even if I rely on my own personal archives - a backup drive and the occasional copy to CD-R - I know these copies will probably not last more than ten years due to "data rot" and hardware obsolesence, or in the event of my untimely demise significantly less. How many of you have uncovered an "old" 5 1/4" floopy disk and wondered just what you will need to do to get data from it. Often even to discover if the disk has anything useful on it would require it to be sent to an expensive data retrieval service. Then what will you do with the old WordStar, WordPerfect or Word1.0 files on it? Take it to the Tech Museum to find a computer able to run the software to decode it, or employ someone data archaeologist to reverse engineer the storage format? It should be clear that persistance and utility of archived data requires a continuous effort to keep it maintained in a useful format on a reasonably persistent media that is still supported by current and affordable hardware.

So it occured to me that what should really be happening is that someone should be archiving data by simplying printing onto paper. Good acid free paper kept away from fire and prolonged water logging will usually last a few hundred years at least. Furthermore it requires no special reading equipment, and is readily converted back to digital format by contemporary scanning equipment. Eventually it is quite possible that entire books could be scanned without even opening them (using X-ray techniques). Thus I'm tempted to start a web preservation campaign called "bits to books". It'll be bad for trees, but if it requires planting large numbers of trees, turning them into paper and not burning them it will actually be a great way to suck large quantities of carbon-dioxide out of the environment on a long term basis and do some good. I haven't yet done the math, but I think with a small, but still readable without optical assistance, font you could probably get 20k bytes of text on a single 8"x10" sheet of paper. I doubt if I could generate more than a gigabyte of original text content in my lifetime, that would be a lot of keystrokes considering the average person only gets 2 billion seconds or so on this planet and never going to spend every waking moment typing! I've yet to do the math of how many pounds of paper that gigabyte translates to and hence many trees will be required to archive my lifetime of data. I suspect its actually not very much at all especially compared to the 750 pound per year average consumption of paper by Americans for non-archival purposes. Counting all the wood pulp that goes into packaging, toilet paper and other wood fibre based products people use brings the total to over 3,000 pounds per year. Suddenly archiving my data to paper suddenly looks quite practical so long as I can find somewhere to store it!

Wednesday, October 15, 2003

Beware of thieves wearing white collars

Today I came across an interesting interview with Frank Abagnale of "Catch me if you can" fame. I've previously got upset about the amount of money corporate America funnels into offshore tax havens each year. I've also got upset about the amount of money that gets laundered through off-shore havens for other purposes. But Mr Abagnale now points out quite rightly that its incredible that no one is getting upset about the staggering amount of money, estimated at $600 billion, being pissed away each year due to white collar crime. That makes Bush's $200 billion to finished Daddy's war look like small potatoes.

Admitedly some of the $600 billion eventually filters back into the economy via the black market. But some of it, too much probably, filters up and out of the food chain into white collar tax havens and cash mountains. As another article by Clifton Leaf seems to indicate, huge amounts of this bleeding of our wealth occurs due to large scale corporate fraud. We've all seen the tips of the white collar crime icebergs in the last couple of years - icebergs called Enron, Global Crossing, and Tyco to name a few but by all accounts the vast majority of white collar crime remains beneath the surface, either undiscovered, unreported, or unprosecuted.

And by all accounts white collar crime pays if you can get away with it. According to Abagnale and Leaf if you do the white collar crime, the odds of being investigated, prosecuted or incarcerated are much much lower than virtually any other crime. The advice of the infamous Abagnale that is supposed to make us feel better? Ignore worthless identity theft insurance, buy a good cross-shredder and check your credit reports as often as possible.

Monday, October 13, 2003

Memos of mass deception

Thanks to Chicken or Beef? for digging up the link to the internal Enron memo mentioned in my entry The Arnold, Enron and Republican power conspiracy. I think this smokng gun of a memo just about confirms Greg Pallasts assertion that Governor Grabass really is in cahoots with the corporate power grabasses at Enron. There seems little left for California to do other than bend over an tell the Republicans "Grab ass!". Sorry I forgot, the majority of the state already did that. Sigh.

Thursday, October 09, 2003

Why software is like a baby

Today I overheard a mother talking about her baby over the phone. The baby had been crying all day and was apparently not well however the mother was just not able to tell what was wrong with it. That's the problem with babies, they have a binary happiness indicator: screaming or not screaming. That tends to rub off on the parents so they become either happy irrepressible champions of their wonderful kids, or screaming beating miserable protagonists of their rotten kids. Both kids and parents alternate between the various states at varying frequencies and seldom is a steady state ever achieved.

While listening to the mother trying to figure out what was wrong with said baby over the phone I was reminded of a software engineer asking a customer or field service person technical questions about their application.

Parent debugging childEngineer debugging program
Is it crying now?Is it still running?
Did you try changing its diaper?Did you apply all the patches?
Did it throw up?Did you get an error message?
Did it have a bowel movement?Did you get a core dump?
Does it keep crying after a bath and feeding?Does it crash after you power off and restart?
Is it screaming and kicking?Is the code thrashing?
Is it lethargic?Is the program slow to respond?
Has it become strangely silent?Has the program hung?

And so it goes on. The evolution of software from its earliest, must buggy days is much like a baby growing up. However unless given the right nurturing it may remain unpredictable, buggy and vulnerable. Much like a baby growing into a kid and eventually an adult. But as we know even adults and mature software are prone to succumb to really nasty viruses and collapse in a useless heap possibly infecting all around them before the do.

A well raised program will give informative error messages, be designed for easy tracing of faults to allow quick diagnosis, and support quick and easy patching for remedy of faults. Moreover it will be well tested, as will patches. The code will be robustly engineered to detect and reject bad inputs or state thus preventing problems from remaining undetected, or causing major unrecoverable data loss and system failure.

So right now as the pointy haired bosses are about to embark on a management offsite I feel like I'm the baby-sitter looking after some software that is undergoing yet another bi-polar disorder episode. Meanwhile the dysfunctional parents are out in the woods trying to find themselves with some primal screaming. Too bad they didn't go for shock therapy...

Oh joy. Pass the Lagavulin by the left hand side because it sure beats baby medicine.

Life at the end of the puddle

Looking at the map of which counties voted for the recall its easy to imagine the Bay Area as the last vestiges of a pool of progressive liberalism evaporating. Deepest in San Francisco county with 80% against the recall, it is surrounded by shallows and lowlands of indifference, rising quickly to ominous mountains in favour of the recall.

I'm reminded of one of those documentaries about life on some African plain, near a lake that is in the final stages of drying out. The people of San Francisco are like the fish helplessly gulping for oxygen as the water stagnates and turns into foul mud. Eventually the water is gone, the fish die and the lake turns to cracked dry earth. All that is left is the relentless heat of the sun and a harsh wind blowing dust across the land.

When is it going to rain again?

Wednesday, October 08, 2003

Watch your back - Governor Grabass is in town!

Well it appears the damage may have been done and Governor Grabass may soon be heading north for Sacramento. Unfortunately for him his wife says she wont be going with him because there aren't any houses nice enough, and there aren't any schools good enough for their kids. Before you ask, no, their kids don't even go to public schools. I guess its too risky for those representing "powerful interests" (not special interest mind you, that would be different altogether) to have their kids in a public school. But its a moot point, they can't even find a good enough private school. So I expect California will be paying for Arnold to fly back and forth to Sacramento on a very regular basis.

Anyway, I digress and maybe, just maybe there is still room for an error in the early calling of the election. From the figures so far its certainly interesting to see how the voting patterns of the state vary from county to county. Its easy to tell which counties voted for the recall - pretty much all those south of Montery and all those east of the Bay Area. Amusingly as I blog, Los Angeles is still showing as a lonely bastion of sanity with the majority against the recall.

However, even though the alleged win for Arnold is being reported as being by a big majority there's actually less than 10% in it. I always find that interesting, how the media interprets 10% as a big number without thought for what it really means. What it really means is that if 5% of voters changed their mind about the recall and voted the other way then there would be no recall at all. Of course even 5% is still a big number, right? Well not really. Do the math. That's one in twenty Californians. Think about it. If we all could name one out of our twently friends that voted for the recall but might have changed their vote, or might have voted mistakenly or based on false information, then the recall would be over - totally.

I don't know about you, but when the decision lies in the hand of one in twenty voters I would call California about evenly divided over the recall and its probably, within the margin of error (hey, not all voters are perfect, let alone the voting machines) a hung state. For me the recall is a big waste of time and money and will only do us harm. It would be nice to think we can all look back Governor Grabass's terrible record in two years and say "I told you so" and feel pretty smug. Anyone in the Bay Area is going to have that privilege being a complete blockade of "NO" voters, with San Francisco county the pinnacle of "NO" at 80% against. But the reality is, we'll all have to suffer for that period to feel smug at the end and just what price will our state pay during that time?

We could draw some comfort in thinking there is already a movement underway to recall Arnold. But I would say that for everyones sanity its essential someone steps up quickly and requires that any future recall should require a two-thirds majority to pass. Thats sufficient majority that it would take more than one in six people to change their vote before the result would change. Everything else is too close to call, or recall.

Just for balance I will report that so far the pinnacle of "YES" on the recall seems to be Stanislaus county that was over 99% in favour. That figure seems quite anomalous since the closest rival was around 75% in favour. Another voting machine problem perhaps???

Tuesday, October 07, 2003

Rober Novak: accessory or Shrub stooge?

Okay I'm going to stick my neck out here, but why the f**k isn't Robert Novak in custody right now as an accessory to the felony of exposing Valerie Plame as a CIA agent? Or at least to be obstructing justice or one of those other convenient "conspiracy to" charges the government always pulls to lock away people who seem to have done something but the evidence doesn't quite match up to the standards required to convict on an "actual" charge.

I know that there is a thing called freedom of the press in the constitution, however I don't believe that gives them the right to commit a crime. And there is no doubt about it, exposing Plame as a CIA agent was a felony plain and simple. And I believe refusing to reveal where he got that information from would be a crime plain and simple since he's not taking the fifth to avoid incriminating himself, he's already incriminated. Or maybe I'm just apply some quaint British standards of justice and there really isn't a thing called obstructing justice in this country. Oh well I'm sure its for the better.

And the reason no Bush aides are guilty? Or so says the Whitehouse... That easy, Bush got Novak to do it himself personally, and Novak will never have the balls to incriminate Bush while he is still in power. You can bet your life as soon as Bush is out of the Whitehouse Novak will be fessing up, or writing a book about it, or maybe collecting a handy payoff somehow for keeping his mouth shut.

Monday, October 06, 2003

That's another fine escape plan ruined

I thought I'd found the ideal location to escape to: Pitcairn Island. This remote island is somewhere in the middle of the South Pacific between Peru and New Zealand (see image below). It has no airstrip, no harbor or port and is 300 miles by boat from the nearest island with one. Its been inhabited more or less continuously since 1790 by the decendents of the Bounty mutineers. In fact a great-great-great-..... grandson of Fletcher Christian was just born there this year. Thanks to a seismic monitoring station it actually just got its first internet connection, having previously relied on a couple of satellite uplinks. According to the CIA world factbook its 50 or so inhabitants managed to generate $730,000 in revenue by selling stamps, registering domains, and handmade craft goods to passing sailors.

Unfortunately when I went to read a bit more about Pitcairn, aside from a fascinating history it also seems to be embroiled in its very own sex scandal. Apparently following the visit of a New Zealand police officer in 1999, there are now seven men on the island accused of sexual assault and abuse. Naturally this has gained quite a bit of press coverage as you can see from this site, the Pitcairners don't exactly seem pleased with the outside interference (or the men don't at least).

So I don't think I'll be rushing off to take up residence on this particular island in the South Pacific any time soon. However Tahiti is looking promising - if it weren't for global warming eating up Pacific Island real-estate faster than G Dubyah can say "Global warming? Bushit!"

InstallShield Sucks

Just when you thought the whole world was going to hell in a handbasket something comes along to take your mind off it. I know this blog is usually categorized as "Political" but let me make a brief digression to introduce to you, what must surely be the most infuriating piece of software I've used in the last four years: InstallShield. I think the name is ironic because for nearly all of the time I am using InstallShield, it seems intent of doing just that - shielding me from building a working installer. Its such an illogical piece of software and it has so many, many different paths to build something that just doesn't work.

And I'll tell you there's one thing worse than building a installer with InstallShield, only to find its broken. That's the twenty minutes or more you'll spend watching InstallShield churn out hundreds of megabytes of data, then all the time you spend installing it only to discover its broken, and then the equal amount of time watching it uninstalll the broken product, only to have to go and start all over again. It can be thirty minutes, or even an hour just to discover and correct the smallest problem, and as I mentioned, InstallShield seems to be deliberately designed to introduce myriads of ways to generate small problems. InstallShield is a major piece of software thats up to version 8 and is used by thousands of people day in and day out and still has really bad bugs that drive you nuts. No wonder the number of people taking anti-depressants is on the rise, its the thought of going to work and having to face software like InstallShield that's doing it.

There, I feel a little better now. But the problem is I still don't have a working installer since I now have a situation that every time I modify my installer to fix the latest "bug" InstallShield then decides it can no longer do a thing without telling me "InstallShield needs to close now". I think it should preface that message with "I can tell you're too angry to continue to use this software", that's about how I feel. Unfortunately if I quit my job to get away from using InstallShield I wont be able to claim unemployment. Crap, they think of everything. So I'm just going to uninstall it from my work machine, copy the entire 240Mb of pain to my home computer over the net and re-install it there in the hope, that it might, just might, decide to play ball and cough out a working installer before the software I'm trying to install becomes obsolete.

In the mean time, did I mention, InstallShield sucks ???

Sunday, October 05, 2003

Nascar Dads - they've got the whole world in their hands

I guess I'm somewhat behind the times, but this week was the first time I'd heard the term "Nascar Dads". Nascar dad sits on the couch, MGD in hand and watches the cars go around and around in a perpetual left turn, waiting for the eventual crash and burn. Its kind of like watching political candidates go around and around with their spin, waiting for the eventual media induced crash and burn. And there you have it, another Governor Grab-ass or President Grab-Intern (in the cash of Bill Clinton) goes to the wall.

As it happens, the future of the world appears to rest in lap of faithful couch-sitting, beer chugging Nascar Dad since he is now the voter with the greatest inclination to vote for the Republican pipe-dream. Apparently Nascar Dad has bought into the "strong father figure" image that GWB and his NeoCons are selling the country. The strong father figure leader tells tales of necessary hardships where Nascar Dad must take one for the team while the tax cuts go to the strongest for the better of the whole. The strong father figure leader acts agressively to defend the family and again Nascar Dads must expect to take a few more for the team at the front line to defend the home territory.

Here is the full story of just who is voting for Republicans now, and why Nascar Dads don't vote for Democrats any more.

Friday, October 03, 2003

The Arnold, Enron and Republican power conspiracy

Greg Palast just published a column in which he posits that Arnold, Enron and the Republican party have a little conspiracy going to get the power companies of out paying $9 Billion in compensation to California. You can read the full story, but the gist of it is that Ken Lay and Arnold were both present in some secret meetings two years ago just after Governor Gray Davis filled suit against the power companies to recoup some of the money that gouged California for. Palast claims that the plan to recall Gray Davis was cooked up so that Arnold to get to power and settle the suit out of court for pennies on the dollar.

I have to say the theory seems to require a long stretch of the imagination, especially because that makes another $9 billion Arnold would have to dig up to get us out of debt. But... if Arnold wins and the power companies promptly get let off the hook, then don't say Greg Palast didn't say so...

Sunday, September 28, 2003

Revisionism for Neocons

Well I'll be, its as is those damned neocons are reading my blog! From this morning's news, Condoleezza Rice's comment when asked if the Whitehouse went around talking to journalists about Joseph Wilson's wife being a CIA operative:

    "I don't remember any such conversations"

Okay, so I was expecting GWB to use that excuse when they get him on the stand at his impeachment hearing. I guess he'll just have to use that other great Neocon coverup:

    "I must have misspoken"

Oh course you must, why would we ever dream that you could have lied to us? Personally I can't wait for the whole misspeaking pack of misdoers to get the heck out of the Whitehouse. Then at least there is a chance that by the time I'm old and gray I'll be able to sit back in my rocker and when my great grand nieces say "Tell us about George Dubbyah in the oh-oh years Uncle", I'll be able to smile wistfully and say "I don't remember". Ah, ignorance is bliss...

The mainstream finally catches up

Finally the topic I covered earlier has actually made it into the mainstream. It seems the media is finally asking questions about who in the government leaked information to the press that exposed Valerie Plame, wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, as an undercover CIA agent jeopardizing the lives of many CIA operatives. So far all fingers are pointing to Neo Con elite member, and Bush's best friend and senior advisor - Karl Rove.

Unfortunately for Rove this is a crime that carries a sentance of up to 10 years in jail. The question is, did Rove do this on his own, at the behest of George W. Bush? If the latter then Bush's Presidential immunity will melt away and he'll be just as elligible for time in the federal "pound me in my republican assets" penitentiary as any of us fodder units are. Or will Rove take one for the President and protect "the man" as Oliver North did for Ronald Reagan? Will we ever see Bush repeating the now infamous "I don't remember" that Reagan used so many times in the Iran-Contra investigations - and got away with it? Only time will tell.

If the mainstream media is what it usually is, it will save the crucifixion of GWB for this, or any of his other dirty little secrets, until just before the election when it is most damaging to his relelection chances, but least damaging to his reputation. By that time they'll be lining up the next martyr at the cross.

Saturday, September 27, 2003

Ban them! Ban them all!

It would be hard not to have noticed that the legislative branch and the judicial branch are locking horns for and against the baning of unsolicited telesales calls. No matter what the House and Senate representatives say, commercial interests have won cases over and over again to show that discrimination between commercial and non-commercial free-speech doesn't cut it in the courts. Personally I don't have a problem with cutting out all unsolicited calls but of course the government is trying to protect its own secret little weapon in mind control - opinion polls.

Without the "political calls" loophole in the telesales call ban we would have no more opinion polls - period. So they have to grandfather in the non-profits and unions and are too afraid to cut them all out and call the telesales people's bluffs. The telesales people have the government by the short and curlies, because they know that the government will never pressure the Supreme Court into okaying discrimination against "commercial free-speech". It'll be fun to watch them squirm but you know who'll lose out of course - you, and me and every member of the proliteriat phone answering masses.

So I say: ban them, ban them all! I don't want any unsolicited phone calls in my house, not commercial, not political, not for profit and not for non-profit. It'll make life much easier. If your unsolicited electrons ring my bell, be it on the phone or in my email its as if you were banging on my door or tapping on my window to make your point. Well listen to my point - I don't want to hear you. I'm not in the street, I'm not at speakers corner, I'm not reading the paper, I'm not watching TV. If you want to communicate with me then put up your web site, allow me to opt in for you email and then allow me to opt out if I'm not interested. Otherwise I never, ever want to hear from you any more than you want me to call you at 8am in the morning or 8pm at night.

If telesales don't get a clue I wont be surprised if the next computer virus will include an autodialer that will call every CEO of every telesales company at 4:00am in the morning and never stop...

Friday, September 26, 2003

Random portents of doom and gloom

This was the day when a woman accused of adultery in Nigeria was saved from a sentence to death - by being burried up to the neck and stoned to death. Her partner in adultery was never charged and it was never clear if international pressure had any bearing or she escaped death due to a technicality. But I truely wonder if America's death by electric chair seems any less barbaric to Nigerians?

This was the day when an 8.0 earthquake hit Japan and the only person reported to have died was hit by a car while picking up broken bottles after the quake.

This was the day when the French government released the latest figures for the number of people who died in the heat wave that hit Europe this summer - over 19,000. NeoCons would probably advise them to shell out for some air-conditioning next summer, and suck down even more CO2 producing power... At least Enron isn't still around to sell it to them, but don't worry, someone will step up to the plate.

This was the day that iconic American symbol of couture - Levis Jeans - announced they are closing their last North American manufacturing plants and would switch to their "world network of manufacturing in over 30 countries". Now designed in the USA Levis will finally be the perfect match for your designed in the USA Nikes.

This was the day Congress steped in to make it clear what they thought of the Federal judge who tried to stop the FTC do not call list. Unfortunately, even after the Senate and GWB have rubber stamped the house bill the 50 million people who have already signed up will most likely get screwed. It'll probably go all the way to the Supreme Court as the telesales corporations say forcing them to honor a do-not-call list is infringing their First Ammendment right to free speech. You see, this is what happens when you let Corporations pretend they are real people and hijack your constitution

This was the day that Maryland announced they would be deploying Diebold electronic voting machines inspite of their own report summarizing that the system is "at high risk of compromise". Instead of adopting fundamentally secure system, or at least one that wasn't already full of known holes, they prefered to recommend 23 patches that, fingers-crossed, will make the machines secure. Everyone knows what comes after 23 security patches - that's right people, more security patches.

This was the day the press picked up on Wednesday's report by CCIA that pointed to a Windows based operating system monoculture as a security risk for the USA and the entire world. According to the report "the world's computer networks are now susceptible to massive, cascading failures". As if on queue, the same day the report was issued the State Department was virtually shut down by the "Welchia" virus and was unable to issue visas for nine hours.