RIAA and EFF are in the same place

As strange as it may appear, the RIAA (lobbying arm of the music industry) and the EFF (lobbying group for civilian privacy among other things), are fighting a war for the same thing: control of their bits, their information. This control used to be self evident. The rule was simple: I own the information, I control it. This let the RIAA put their bits on little plastic disks, and charge huge sums of money. This same control, allowed private citizens (who the EFF is defending) to have some confidence that they couldn’t be aggregated, observed and analyzed in huge databases at the twiddle of a mouse.

The two organizations are fighting for the same thing, and that fight is subject to the same inescapable forces. And as certain as gravity, the war they think they are fighting, has already been lost. No amount of legislation, protest, battle, will put the respective genies back in the bottle.

In each case, there was a moment that signified a turning point. For the RIAA it started right at the beginning, with Napster, which allowed music sharing on an industrial scale. Once Napster had hit the scene, all was over. Despite the RIAA successfully blowing the service out of the water, the celebrations were only momentary. Many new services slipped right into Napster’s niche, and today, the children of Napster rule the Earth.

As for the EFF, there is non other than Osama Bin Laden, who, by murdering 3,000 people, succeeded in enslaving the other 6 billion in a surveillance society. Terrorism has been used as an excuse for almost every loss of privacy, every subsequent invasion of what used to be our own space.

But these incidents are effect not cause. Cause is the Internet. And though the EFF would like to put our personal information back in a jar, and the RIAA would like to stick their music back in the music shops, it would be like stopping the rising of the sun, or undoing the nuclear age. The Internet made information free, and not all of the information it made free is information we would like to set free.

And now for the evidence:

The US department of homeland security now searches laptops and MP3 players when people enter the country. Invasive? You bet. Worse than having someone go through your dirty underwear is someone going through your emails, isn’t it? (laptop searches) Here’s another example, where the FBI tapped the email of an entire ISP. Accidental? Yes. A surprise? No. (email surveillance)

And I don’t need to tell you about the numerous attempts to stop the trading of music online, such as in the UK: (ISP control). But to see how it’s all going, just head over to Pirate Bay.

It’s all over folks. It’s 1984 in 2008, and guess what? We get free music with a slight threat of a lawsuit in exchange for having our every move scrutinized by any government or worse, anyone with a powerful server. And maybe we can get the worst of both worlds: punitive lawsuits based on government surveillance!

Femtocells are girly crap

I hear so much about femtocells as the new cool technology. But I get stuck on the part where some dimwit actually installs one in their house.

Here’s how I see the conversation between the mobile provider and their customer going:

‘Hello, my phone has crap service.’
‘Do you have a broadband line?’
‘Yes, from ThrottleNet? Why? I get crap service from them too.’
‘I’ll send you this device, you have to plug it into the back of your internet router. That will improve your call quality.’
‘What’s a router?’
‘That thing your broadband comes through.’
‘Oh, the one with the USB thing that comes out?’
‘Yes. Does it also have an Ethernet port?’
‘What’s that?’

Do you see where I’m going with this?

The mobile providers are smokin’ the ganja, quite simply. They gotta give something for the inconvenience which is more than a ‘better’ connection and complex setup. Hopefully they have some bright ideas. I suspect the bright idea is to bundle  broadband with the service, and then put the femtocell in the router. I’d like to see how that goes. Scale anyone?

Wake up Commercial Software, Open Source is kicking your ass

Here’s why I don’t like to buy commercial software. Maybe you have a different view.

I’m currently in the position to purchase substantial amounts of software for my clients. And I feel weird. I sit and listen to sales people tell me why their commercial version of the software is better than the free and open source version I’m considering instead, and they are struggling to convince me.
Here are some of the reasons they give me:

1. Support: Them The thesis here is that commercial software comes with support, so when something goes wrong, I can call the vendor, and they will efficiently speed a fix to me. Me What I seem to get from support is the right to call someone up during business hours and have them confirm to me that it doesn’t work. I find that the leading open source applications tend to have forums full of extensive debugging information–much better than the commercial products.
2. Certification: Them I get the comfort of knowing that my configuration is certified and that it will work. Me In my experience, this ‘guarantee’ is revoked as and when it suits a vendor.
3. Features: Them I’m always told the commercial version has features that the free one doesn’t. Me It’s funny, but all too often, the commercial features aren’t needed by me, so I’m not sure why I should pay for them.
4. You are cheap: Them You can’t expect to get everything for nothing. Me Well, yes, actually. If what I need is available as open source, that will do nicely, thank you.

And then there’s my fundamental irritations with the products I get from commercial software vendors:

1. License keys: With commercial applications come license keys. I’ve had far too many software failures due to the vendor giving me bad license keys, or failing to inform me about upcoming expirations. This runs the gamut from Windows on a desktop all the way up to high availability software for mega servers. License keys are the bane of my existence. Isn’t this one of the major reasons corporations aren’t upgrading to Vista? Because it’s just too hard to manage the damn keys and activations?
2. Fees every time I add to the configuration: Commercial software vendors like to think that they are tailoring their solution to my needs. What this means for me, is that every time I add a user, add a CPU or change a server, I actually need to add to my license armada and pay money. What a serious management pain in the ass. Can’t I just get one license that covers my whole organization, and then adjust it once a year?
3. One product is actually many products: In addition to the previous problem, it turns out that most ‘enterprise’ (read expensive) products come with about forty different SKUs. In order to use the product, you need a ‘base module’, and a ‘management module’ and a set of ‘user license packs’ and a ‘network access module’, and so on. The product is useless without all the modules, but the sales person invariably forgets an expensive module during the quoting, and you only find out half-way through the implementation that more money will be required.
4. Every conceivable use is a different license: If you use it on one OS, and then switch to a new OS, that is a new license. Switch to new hardware: more money please. Add a networked drive: cha-ching. My perpetual licenses are always locked to hardware that will be obsolete in a year, so I’m constantly throwing one away and purchasing a new one, for the same product!

So in short: For so many reasons, I find myself having to be seriously convinced to go the commercial software route. It just makes my job of managing it, far to complicated, and my job is complicated enough.

My advice to the commercial software companies out there: wake up and smell your user’s needs. Your licensing methods are offensive, increase your user’s costs immensely, and actually reduce the value your product adds. And remember, if you don’t want to change, there’s plenty of open source software out there for your users to turn to.

PS: For some reason, so many integrators out there only know commercial software. They will relentlessly steer you that way, even when you tell them clearly you want an open source solution. I think there are two reasons: 1. Kickbacks, commissions, and lead generation. 2. CYA: Cover Your Ass. At least there is a vendor to point the finger at if something goes wrong. Neither of these reasons are compelling to me however.

Vista Media Center Widescreen over S-Video

I’ve been struggling for months to get my widescreen CRT TV working properly in Vista Media Center. I’ve finally found the solution after grubbing through myriad forums and blogs. This applies most in Europe where anamorphic widescreen is common.

Maybe this will help you.

The problem:
I got everything working, so that I could use the media center. My setup (the relevant parts):

• ATI X1950 GT graphics card
• Hauppauge Nova T-500 DVB-T tuner card
• Bog standard box running Vista Home Premium
• JVC widescreen CRT TV
• ATI card connected to TV via S-Video cable

Everything looked fine when I watched recorded TV, but in fact, the images were stretched too wide. This was most noticable when watching fashion models waddle down the runway.

It turns out it’s quite simple:

1. Tasks -> Settings -> TV -> Configure Your TV or Monitor
2. Go through the wizard. When it asks ‘Identify Your Display Type’, choose Monitor.
3. Now here comes the wierd part. On the next screen, choose ‘DVI, VGA, or HDMI’, even though you are using S-Video.
4. On the next screen, choose ‘Widescreen (16:9)’.
5. Then choose 576i as your screen resolution.
6. From there on in, do what the nice wizard says.

I had to start and stop Media Center after this a few times, as well as playing with the zoom feature on videos, and suddenly, presto, videos were showing in widescreen.

CAVEAT: Don’t know yet what happens after a suspend or a reboot. Will update when I’ve got results.

A few more Media Center Tips:

• MCE Standby Tool will help solve your standby problems. However, do not enable the regular reboots. These seemed to get afoul of my dodgy Vista drivers, so things wouldn’t start up correctly.
• Don’t let Windows Update reboot the machine. Every time my machine reboots, something goes wrong. Do this manually, when nothing is recording and you are sitting there to make sure it is happy.

Do Not Sue list for Class Actions

I can recall getting a class action settlement for Toshiba (the floppy drive on laptops like mine–but not mine–did something wrong sometimes). What did I get? A $200 voucher to buy Toshiba stuff. Worthless since I wasn’t buying any Toshiba stuff.

My Verizon Wireless settlement got me even less (they rounded calls up to the minute for billing–was anyone really confused after their first bill?). I think it was a check for around $4 and Verizon agreed to make the fine print bigger.

So who made money on all this? Well, one is forced to suspect that it was the lawyers. Check out the discussion on Overlawyered.

So, here’s my view. All the class actions I’ve been hauled into over the years have been of no value to me. Somehow I suspect I’m not the only one.

Let’s take the money away from the lawyers, and put it back into the pockets of the big corporations, so they can charge us less for products. How about this: a “Do Not Sue” register? If you are on it, class-action lawyers wouldn’t be able to add you as a member of the class without your express approval.

Now all you legal-eagle types out there will ask: So how do we keep the blood-sucking companies from giving us terrible customer service, and shoddy products? My answer: Hell if I know, but clearly class actions aren’t doing anything to help us.

Note: the class actions I’ve had the dubious pleasure of being involved with are not correlated with bad customer experiences I’ve had. Probably more the opposite.

CNet Promotes Second Life

The highly impartial news.com, is clearly shilling for Second Life. Nothing else can explain their rabid habit of writing articles about the crappy MMOG or whatever these virtual worlds are called.

Number of articles on CNet’s news.com related to:
Second Life: 15,200
World of Warcraft: 5,390
* Google search “Second Life” site:news.com; “World of Warcraft” site:news.com

User Count:
SL: 500,000
WoW: 8.5 million
* http://gigaom.com/2007/06/13/top-ten-most-popular-mmos/

You decide who is impartial.

Microsoft and Facebook

So Microsoft put $240 million into Facebook, valuing the social networking company at $15 billion. My ass. There is no such value. Here’s how the negotiation actually went:

Microsoft: Give us exclusive access to your ads.
Facebook: Woo, that’ll cost you. We’re a premium property. We’ll negotiate hard, like the Web 2.0 muthas that we are. We have a high valuation, you know.
M$: We can pay. How much?
FB: A lot.
M$: OK, $240 million.
FB: We’re *NOT* giving you 40% of the company for that! [Stamps foot.]
M$: Who said anything about 40%?
FB: Well, that’s what the last VC said. [Timid sniveling look.]
M$: Just exclusive access to the network. Keep your company.
FB: But that’s not fair. How can we boost our valuation? You *HAVE* to take a stake. You just *HAVE* to! [Stamps foot harder]
M$: [Writing check] Just remember, no Google.
FB: But take a chunk.
M$: Fine.
FB: It’s incredible. [Face of extreme cunning.] You’re getting, wait for it, one point seven percent!
M$: Here’s the check. Don’t spend it all in one place, son.
FB: That makes our valuation $15 *BILLION*. [Big smile]
M$: Whatever.
FB: 15 BILLION. [Bigger smile]
M$: Sign here. Right where it says: NO GOOGLE.
FB: [Signs] 15 BILLION. Wippee.

Buses Slipstreaming

The last time I got off a bus on my way home, two other buses arrived seconds later, all from my route. Now normally, seeing many buses on your favorite route is good news. But not here, since I had waited twenty minutes for my bus when they are supposed to arrive every 8-12 minutes. What a $!£$% nightmare!

It’s raised a big question in my mind. Why do buses slipstream? I.e. why do buses follow each other closely, one behind the other, sometimes even leapfrogging, like the lead cyclists in the Tour de France? Do buses like to herd, and will they do so whenever possible?

I’ve come up with some possible reasons, but I have no actual evidence, and no scientific analysis:
- The buses leave their depots with almost no consideration for the schedules they are supposed to keep. Since the drivers don’t check with each other about departure times, the buses arrive randomly
- More plausibly, the lead bus gets slowed down along the way. Now at every stop there are more passengers, slowing it down even further. This leaves the second bus is going faster than the lead bus. 1. Because it is not running into the initial delay. 2. As it gets closer and closer, there are fewer and fewer passengers to pick up. The second bus travels much faster than the lead bus, until it catches it.

Does anyone know how to name this painful transportation illness?

Terms of Service and Peer to Peer

I’ve been thinking lately about a hypothetical situation. Consider it a thought balloon.

If we run a peer to peer program, such as BitTorrent, or eDonkey, the RIAA and the MPAA love to root around in our computers and investigate what’s there, without warrants or any invitation whatsoever. They look around, see what they can find–in my line of work this is called a fishing expedition–and if they are lucky, find some contraband: a shared movie or a new Britney Spears song (as if anybody wants those anymore). On the back of that contraband, they’ll send us a demand for money. If we aren’t suitably impressed, they sue us.

I’m not too excited by this. It actually kind of sucks, since most people didn’t invite any industry associations to come looking at their machine.

What to do? The answer (maybe?), is Terms of Service. Terms of Service? you ask.

Stick with me here, because it will take a little explanation. You know how most web sites have terms of service? You have to agree all kinds of things. For example, blogger, in section 2 states the following:

You agree that you are responsible for your own use of the Service, for any posts you make and for any consequences thereof. You agree that you will use the Service in compliance with all applicable local, state, national and international laws, rules and regulations, including any laws regarding the transmission of technical data exported from your country of residence and all United States export control laws.

Pretty stern stuff, actually. But that’s how they keep the lawyers happy, and that’s exactly what I’m proposing here.

Couldn’t peer to peer networks take advantage of Terms of Service to control how the computers on the network are accessed?

I’m thinking along the lines of

you may only access this computer in order to get documents for your own personal use. The organization of information on this computer is copywrited and any access for reasons of property control, or determining the sharing of files, is not permitted. In fact, your invitation to access this computer is completely at my discretion, and you are not invited if you will use the information you gather for the purposes of copyright enforcement.

I don’t know. It’s a bit clumsy, obtuse, and maybe too specific. The wording is almost certainly wrong, but is there wording that isn’t? Is the principle sound from a legal point of view? Could each computer on the network, tell the RIAA to buzz off, ‘you’re not welcome anymore’?

It would be nice to think that we have a right to the privacy of our own computers. Shouldn’t the RIAA require probably cause before they can investigate? A little bit like how we can hide our caller id before making a call on the telephone.

So let’s say there is a legal wording that works. What happens?

Well, the next time the RIAA, or any other enforcer accessed our computers, that organization would be liable to a civil suit for violation of terms in our Terms of Service. Now that would be radical.

And thinking further, maybe even the DMCA could be brought in, along the lines of the copyleft of the GPL. That could be cool.

Still, there are a few technical hurdles to be overcome.

Imagine the technological approach: Every time a peer to peer client accesses a peer to peer server (the machine with the alleged Britney Spears mp3 on it), that client would have to agree to the Terms of Service, before the server would serve anything.

Now of course, this could be extremely tedious for the user of the client to constantly agree to terms of service while using a peer to peer network. Thousands of packets across hundreds of servers would have to be agreed to during even the most basic execution of a typical eMule transaction. Each time the client accessed a server, ToS’s would pop up. That’s unworkable, really.

But there is a solution around the problem. It’s software, and ToS standardization.

Basically, it requires that all servers on the network in question, use the exact same ToS. Now all the user has to do, is agree to the ToS for all servers that use this ToS. All the servers have to do is verify that the right version of the ToS was agreed by the client, and off they go.

This requires baking the ToS into the p2p protocol. This would force every communication in the protocol to include the following dialog:


client: request directory (or other sensitive info)
server: tos agreed?
client: confirm tos agreed
server: directory listing returned


OK, so it’s just a thought. I’m curious what other people think of this idea.

Writing Stuff

I now write for a living. No, I live to write. I work for a living. Sorry, it’s all too confusing. How did it come to this?

But here’s my point: I’ve found it extremely strange how the vast majority of people who write, find it impossible to talk about their writing, or worse, their ‘writing process’. They don’t like to talk about it and then when they do, they have very little to say. Generalities more than advice. Platitudes rather than Plato.

And yet, here’s me. I don’t know anything about being published, since I never have had anything published, and yet I’m ready to bend anyone’s ear about how I write.

Does that mean I don’t know anything about writing? Probably. Or should I secretively keep everything under wraps (my special intellectual property sauce)? Who knows.

Keep it here to hear more about my writing journey. Unless of course, I’m actually writing instead of writing about writing.