« May 2006 | Main | July 2006 »

June 30, 2006

New Cold War: The Home Front

The Media's New Cold War

An essential element of the last, forty-year cold war was manichean, double-standard thinking on both sides that relentlessly vilified the other, denied it had any legitimate national interests outside its own borders and blamed it for every conflict. The result was to maximize differences, minimize mutual understandings and inspire a nearly catastrophic nuclear arms race.
I am not sure the New Cold War is with Russia or China - unless they turn out to be the ultimate backers of the Islamist terrorist threat - but right now that description sums up the current atmosphere between the USAxis and the IslamicAxis really well.

The threat of the "homegrown terrorist" now means that the New Cold War will invade the home front - with increased propaganda, blacklists, cointelpro operations , surveillance - and yes, yet more data-mining of phone calls, emails and financial records.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 3:22 PM |

June 29, 2006

Surfing with Cleanfeed

The Guardian Online has an article about Internet filtering that points up a lot of the problems with the technology - like the fact that it is expensive to implement and does not work anyway

There's just one problem. ISPs say the costs are huge, running to hundreds of thousands of pounds for a large provider, and that the suggested filters are easily circumvented.

Furthermore, a Cambridge professor of computing who has analysed the blocking system developed by BT, which claimed in 2004 to have been used to block thousands of attempted visits to banned sites, says it could be exploited by paedophiles to compile a list of the worst sites.

It goes on to quote Richard Clayton - who studied the Cleanfeed system and concluded that it could be "reverse engineered" to provide a directory of illegal websites

I have commented at length about censorware and pointed out that blacklist censorship of this kind does not prevent children being abused, that perverts are more likely to use P2P than the web, that the system had been found to be easily reverse engineered.and also expressed the opionion that LINX should be more concerned the with burden that implementing Cleanfeed will place on their members.

Now that the Guardian has expressed similar - although slightly more moderate - opinions, maybe public opionion will be roused to protect freedom of speech - but I doubt it.

For anyone who can't figure out why I am against censorware such as Cleanfeed being applied like a cyber-security blanket across the net - here are the reasons yet again.

1. It doesn't stop children being abused.

2. It doesn't stop perverts looking at illegal material.

3. It can be reverse engineered to provide a directory of illegal material.

4. It is expensive to implement - and doesn't work anyway.

5. It use a "secret" blacklist which is not open to inspection by ordinary people - but see (3) above.

6. There is no transparency in the "blacklists"- which could be manipulated for commercial or political gain.

7. Secret "blacklists" have no place in any "open" democratic country. - there must be checks and balance to monitor them - and currently there are none.

I have also opined that :
the government should tackle the root causes of illegal material on the Internet by attacking the criminal gangs who are linked to human trafficking for sexual activity, child pornography, and pornography spam
rather than placing the problem "out of sight and out of mind" by using internet filtering rather than tackling the real root causes of child abuse.

For some reason the government are hell bent on imposing censorware that doesn't work in stopping child abuse, but which guarantees censorship of everything you hear, see and read on the web.

What is the real agenda here? Enquiring minds want to know ....

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 4:37 PM |

P2P is a Crime

Now P2P is a crime - according to this article Spain outlaws P2P filesharing

A Spanish intellectual property law has finally banned unauthorized peer-to-peer file-sharing in Spain, making it a civil offense even to download content for personal use.

The legislation, approved by Congress on Thursday, toughens previous provisions. An early May circular from Spain's fiscal general del estado, or chief prosecutor, allowed downloads for purely personal use.

Now I haven't got to the bottom of what "unauthorised peer-to-peer" file sharing is - but this article from Slashdot suggests that the law effectively outlaws all P2P file sharing.
Spanish Congress has made it a civil offense to download anything via p2p networks, and a criminal offense for ISP's to allow users to file-share, even if the use is fair.

There is also to be a tax on all forms of blank media, including flash memory drives. I guess the move towards distributing films legally via BitTorrent is a no go in Spain.

So I can't determine from all this is whether all P2P file sharing has become illegal - even for Open Source software, Creative Copyright material and self produced material.

Suppose I place a copy of "Hackers Handbook" on a P2P torrent along with some MP3's of tracks I have made and a bunch of pictures I have taken - all under Creative Copyright - am I then a criminal because I have decided to use a P2P network as my method of distribution?

But the law goes even further - it requires ISP's to take active measures to prevent P2P file sharing.

Instead of directly going after the filesharers themselves the Spanish have decided to make it a criminal offence for Internet providers to facilitate filesharing. It's not clear how "facilitate filesharing" is defined, but if it simply means "allowing it to happen", ISPs in Spain are in for some massive headaches. Blocking P2P is far from easy because it's possible to "hide" the traffic by using standard Internet protocol ports (like http and ftp) and encryption.
So while one part of the law might allow me to distribute Open Source software and Creative Copyright material - the other part of the law means that ISP's have to try and stop me - how crazy is that?

Right now I can't figure out how far this law is going to go - but it looks like a blow not just against copyright violation theft - but also against the whole Open Source and Creative Commons movement by denying them the right to distribute material which is not copyright violating via P2P networks.

It strangles small net record companies who use P2P to distribute their music under Creative Copyright at low cost, it penalises the Open Source movement who distribute software at low cost, and it strangles innovative ideas - such as delivering legal content via P2P networks - at birth.

When P2P networks are criminalised only outlaws will use P2P networks - how many times have you heard that sort of thing and thought "it will nver happen"

Now it has.

Tags: , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 11:24 AM |

June 28, 2006

The Amazon ‘Stonehenge’

Another ‘Stonehenge’ discovered in Amazon
-

SAO PAULO, Brazil - A grouping of granite blocks along a grassy Amazon hilltop may be the vestiges of a centuries-old astronomical observatory — a find that archaeologists say shows early rainforest inhabitants were more sophisticated than previously believed.

The 127 blocks, some as high as 9 feet (2.75 meters) tall, are spaced at regular intervals around the hill, like a crown 100 feet (30 meters) in diameter.

On the shortest day of the year — Dec. 21 — the shadow of one of the blocks disappears when the sun is directly above it.

It looks like the building of stone monuments to track astronomical events was widely spread across the globe.

The discipline of Astro-Archaeology has now gone far beyond the crazed theories of Erich Von Daniken or an interest in Ley Lines.

Researchers have found that stone monuments aligned with astronomical events such as sunrise and sunset at the time of the solstice(s) are commonplace almost everywhere ancient man developed early civilisation.

I find it all very interesting - but a key question remains unanswered for me:

Was the knowledge used to build these stone monuments discovered independently across the globe, or was there a dissemination of knowledge, along with the normal trade goods, that spread this information far and wide.

Certainly there is a lot of evidence that suggests trade routes - especially sea trade routes - were widely used in the ancient world: Phoenicians from Gades traded with tin miners in Cornwall, Roman amphora have been found underwater in the Americas, and spices were shipped from South East asia via the Middle East.

Was astronomical knowledge disseminated along with these trade goods?

It seems highly likely - navigators have an interest in the stars along with farmers - one for navigation and one for growing and planting - so the soil is ripe for the cross-pollination of knowledge between civilisations.

The great thing about this idea is that it doesn't rely on alien intervention or a mythical "Atlantis" to explain the global distribution this type of stone monument - it uses the information already available without uneccesarily postulating unknown theoretical entities.

Tags: , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 12:08 PM |

June 27, 2006

Open Science

I thought that this site for tracking shipping was interesting, but then I found out that the Glomar Explorer was located in the Gulf of Mexico.

I wondered why it was there, and then I found out it was in "mothballs" - set aside for possible use and minimally maintained - rather than in active service.

Why is the Glomar Explorer in mothballs?

Surely the best thing to do is to donate the Glomar Explorer to an NGO or, better still, a group that was promoting Open Science, in order that it could be put back into useful service again

After all it was only built in 1974 - in order to search for the lost Soviet submarine K-129 - and it is not very old really.

Not like some of the ships in the US Navy - for example, the USS Enterprise (1961) - which is currently on active duty in the Persian Gulf.

Not only that, but how much does it cost to keep the Glomar Explorer in mothballs?

Surely the economic benefits of handing it off to an Open Science group would be enough reason in itself.

Afterwards there would be further economic impact - the ship would have to be taken out of mothballs, refurbished, refitted and crewed - all at the expense of an Open Science group who would raise money through public donations - but which would produce a long-term net income across the economy rather than a long term drain.

Let's not forget - this is a ship that was paid for by the taxpayer - and will continue to be paid for by the taxpayer until it is scrapped.

Why not turn a net loss into a net gain?

Let's not forget the science ...

An NGO or Open Science group who took on the Globar Explorer would have a chance to do deep ocean science - without a penny from the public purse-strings - and possibly generate new findings which could alter our understanding of the deep oceans.

But why stop there?

How much other hi-tech kit remains in moth balls from the Old Cold War?

How many other ships and planes currently costing the taxpayer money could be handed over to Open Science groups?

All of these handovers would make a public purse liabilty into a public purse asset - and possibly provide scientific findings which can benefit the entire community.

How many ICBM's could be modified to launch small payload satellites - for amateurs like AMSAT - or other imaginative, cutting edge science projects - all at low cost?

How many bunkers, buildings and land - which cost money to maintain in mothballs - could be sold off, rented or even *ahem* maybe given back to the public which paid for those developments in the first place?

The bunkers for disaster recovery companies, the barracks leased to artist's colonies, and the land returned to nature and turned into community run natural parks.

Why not?

If it is not needed - if its in mothballs and is costing money solely to be be maintained in a state of non-use - why not return it to the people that paid for it in the first place?

Enquiring minds want to know ....

Tags: , , , ,


UPDATE: It looks like the Glomar Explorer has been taken out of mothballs and leased to an oil company - Global Santa Fe - which would explain why it was in the Gulf of Mexico and not in mothballs in California ....
UPDATE 2: You can find more information about the Glomar Explorer or the "GSF Explorer", as it is now called, here.(PDF)

Posted by Dr. K at 1:34 PM |

June 26, 2006

Seven Minutes to Midnight

It looks like the time on the Doomsday Clock hasn't been moved forward since 2002.

We move the hands taking into account both negative and positive developments. The negative developments include too little progress on global nuclear disarmament; growing concerns about the security of nuclear weapons materials worldwide; the continuing U.S. preference for unilateral action rather than cooperative international diplomacy; U.S. abandonment of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty and U.S. efforts to thwart the enactment of international agreements designed to constrain proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons; the crisis between India and Pakistan; terrorist efforts to acquire and use nuclear and biological weapons; and the growing inequality between rich and poor around the world that increases the potential for violence and war. If it were not for the positive changes highlighted later in this statement, the hands of the clock might have moved closer still.
Might I suggest to the The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that recent developments in Iran - leading to the likelyhood that they are determined to develop nuclear weapons no matter what the international community say or do - means that the clock should be moved forward a little bit.

Looking at the "Doomsday Clock" timeline gives me some ideas.

We should be around "five minutes to midnight" - but the day the Iranians explode their first nuclear weapon we will be right back to "three minutes to midnight" - just like in 1949 when the Soviet Union exploded their first atomic bomb.

Once that happens we can expect the "New Cold War" to kick off in earnest as each side begins a new arms race - draining money and resources away from other projects and fostering a climate of fear and paranoia - again.

Tags: , , , , ,




Posted by Dr. K at 12:08 PM |

600 Million People

World Jump Day is coming to a place near you "Real Soon Now" (tm)

No seriously, the folks at World Jump Day have calculated that if 600 million people all jump at the same time - we can slightly shift the planetary orbit of Earth.

Scientists from the ISA/Munchen (Germany) have produced a report ... which confirms that planet Earth could be driven out of its current orbital rotation by the combined force of human beings.

Prof. Hans Niesward and his colleagues at the Department of Graviationphysik estimated that it would take a minimum of 600 Miliion people on the western hemisphere to jump at the same moment.

Why bother? Well according to these guys a succesful "jump" could save the planet by reducing global warming to a minimum.

It sounds like a bunch of scientists warming up their theories in public - without concern for the consequences.

It also reminds me of those old Cold War "science paranoia" movies - like The Day the Earth Caught Fire (1961) - where scientists explode atomic bombs and tilt the Earth into a new orbit that causes - you guessed it - global warming on a massive scale.

Or maybe Crack In the Earth (1965) - where a scientist attempts to develop eco-friendly geothermal energy - by dropping an atomic bomb deep into the Earth's crust.

I think you get the point - strange science like this might well make the problem worse - rather than better.

I console myself that if we get it wrong we can always try and correct it by having another "World Jump Day".

But it could be another hundred years before the Earth is in the correct position for a "succesful" jump attempt again - so if the scientists have their figures,or their theories, totally wrong - it will be getting hotter for a long time yet.

Tags: , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 11:00 AM |

June 25, 2006

Extraterrestrial Scarab Beetle

Interesting story from "The Times" about how scientists might have figured out where the glass came from that was used to contruct the scarab beetle found in Tutankhamun's tomb.

SCIENTISTS believe they have solved the mystery surrounding a piece of rare natural glass at the centre of an elaborate necklace found among the treasures of Tutankhamun, the boy pharaoh.

They think a fragile meteorite broke up as it entered the atmosphere, producing a fireball with temperatures over 1,800C that turned the desert sand and rock into molten lava which became glass when it cooled.

This is of considerable interest - it is generally believed that the Ancient Egyptians did not have the technology to smelt iron until they learnt it - possibly from the Celts - so it is believed that they only had access to "meteoritic iron" before this period.

Amidst all of the gold of Tutankhamon's tomb, ONE object of precious iron was layed at his side...a dagger made of meteoric iron.
Could this iron be from the same meteorite that made the natural glass? It certainly seems like more than a coincidence that two objects associated with meteor strikes appear in the tomb of the same Pharoah.

But the mystery does not end there - there is evidence to that the Ancient Egyptians has access to iron before the burial of Tutankhamun.

On Friday May 26th 1837, during the Vyse excavations at Giza, one of the excavators, J R Hill, found an iron plate embedded in the cement of an inner joint at the southern `Star Shaft' of the Kings Chamber.

It was around 12 by 4 inches and 1/8th of an inch thick.

More interestingly it was deeply embedded in the masonry and had to be removed by blasting apart the outer two tiers of stones.


So what is the truth about the knowledge of metallurgy in Ancient Egypt? Enquiring minds want to know ....

Tags: , , , , ,


read more | digg story

Posted by Dr. K at 10:59 PM |

Anti-virus software market breaks US$4 billion barrier

According to this report the AV market is now worth $4 billion.

How did we ever get into this mess?

Why aren't the security holes we knew about 10 years ago fixed already?

Enquiring minds want to know ....

Tags: , ,

>
read more | digg story

Posted by Dr. K at 12:00 AM |

June 24, 2006

Telemarketing Sales Droids

Good piece here on how to prevent telemarketers called No Telemarket

Most Telemarketers use what is called Predictive Dialers, which are PCs with software that dials every number in a phone exchange until it gets lucky.

Now you can use their own technology against them, and it's legal. Here is how their system works: the dialer calls your number, you answer, and you have probably notice the line appears dead after you said, "Hello".

What their computer is doing is listening for a short burst of audio, your "HELLO", followed by a period of silence.

With this heard, it will log your phone number as valid and transfer the call to an available telemarketer, the reason for the delay before someone comes on line.

I have a better way of dealing with telemarketers - after you realise that you have a phone sales droid on the phone - rap sharply on the desk as though someone is knocking at the door and then say "hang on a moment - someone is at the door".

Place the phone on the desk and walk away.

The sales droid will hang on, and on, and on waiting for you to come back - which you don't of course.

Come back after 15 minutes and listen - if the sales droid is still there - give it another 15 minutes.

This approach has the benefits of costing the telemarketing company money and ties up the resources of one sales droid for the length of time it takes them to realise you are not coming back.

One day they might realise that telephone spam is just as annoying as email spam and junk mail - but only if we demonstrate the telemarketing does not work becuase everyone has rejected the method and it costs too much money to make too few sales.

Tags: , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 11:23 AM |

June 23, 2006

When is a pirate not a pirate?

Good article about the impact of first world copyright laws on third world countries which examines the impact of the raid by the American Association of Publishers on copy shops providing cheap copies to third world students who want to become doctors.

read more | digg story

Tags: , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 2:53 PM |

June 19, 2006

Beyond Risks

Going back to Beyond Fear - and thinking back to my IT-OPS days - then filtering through my current filter - I came up with the following.

People exaggerate spectacular but rare risks and downplay common risks.
How many disaster recovery programs look at the worst-case scenarios - while ignoring the possibility that the postroom label printer PC is their worst enemy?
People have trouble estimating risks for anything not exactly like their normal situation.
Your building burning down, struck by lightning, a flood that buries your data centre, or a terrorist bomb are not "normal" situations.

Plan for them now and when a backhoe cuts your power and phone - you can cope.

Personified risks are perceived to be greater than anonymous risks.
The "I must be target" syndrome.

Maybe you are and maybe you aren't.

You only need to assess it properly and not give into the FUD factor - then take appropriate measures.

People underestimate risks they willingly take and overestimate risks in situations they can't control.
So they outsource their IT infrastructure in the hope they won't be held responsible when it all fails ...
People overestimate risks that are being talked about and remain an object of public scrutiny.
Of course!

I think its called the "Advertising" these days ...

It looks to me that "black hats" and "white hats" alike are making a LOT of money from these threats ,,,

How *do* you think that these "security companies" who specialise in patching up the incompetencies of the Big Software companies make a living?

By patching up the "insecurity" factors of YOUR operating system - the elements that need "patch tuesday" on a weekly basis.

But - why should they need to?

Why isn't the operating system secure in the first place?

Enquiring minds want to know ...

DISCLAIMER: This risk assesement document is skewed towards Docklands in London - hence the emphasis on fire, flood and terrorist bombs - all of which I had to prepare for ...

Tags: , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 9:19 PM |

Electronic Hezbollah

I have already talked about this interview between John Perry Barlow of the EFF and Dan Glickman of the MPAA here but on reflection I found I objected to John Perry Barlow's comments about the "Electronic Hezbollah".

... they're up against 17-year-olds who have turned themselves into electronic Hezbollah because they resent the content industry for its proprietary practices ...

There are a lot of kids out there copying and distributing movies not because they care about seeing the movies or sharing them with their friends but because they want to stick it to the movie business.

I find that comments like this not just unhelpful in furthering the debate about copyright - but actually helping to reinforce the RIAA & MPAA propaganda line that "P2P file sharing is piracy".

While the rest of the world is trying to fight off the current RIAA & MPAA propaganda line that ANY form of P2P file sharing is "piracy" and "copyright theft" here is John Perry Barlow telling the WHOLE WORLD that P2P violations of Big Media companies are caused by an "electronic Hezbollah" who only want to "stick it to the movie business".

The phrase "putting out fire with gasoline" comes to mind.

With "friends" like John Perry Barlow to do the propaganda PR for the RIAA & MPAA - who needs enemies ...

Furthermore, the very use of the phrase "electronic hezbollah" in this context is offensive - the words "digital underground" or "digital resistance" could have sufficed

The use of the word "hezbollah" in this context makes me as annoyed as when the RIAA & MPAA call digital copyright violators "pirates".

Copyright violation thieves are not "pirates" and the people who oppose them are not the "hezbollah" - pirates rape, kidnap and kill people and the hezbollah is outlawed as a terrorist organisation across the globe.

Labelling people who oppose DRM and harsh digital copyright laws - along with those actively breaking those copyright laws - as an "electronic hezbollah" - does nothing more than smear them by making it look like they are terrorists.

The RIAA & MPAA could not buy advertising like this - it only helps to harden attitudes on both sides of the fence.

Right now figuring out how to fix the whole digital copyright mess - without DRM and without giving up our existing rights under copyright law - should be our only priority.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 4:25 PM |

June 16, 2006

Beyond Fear

This article, The Scariest Terror Threat of All by Bruce Schneier makes a lot of sense to me - it also explains the dynamic of upping the FUD factor to a level at which your products are going to sell really well and you make a lot of money.

The best ideas tap directly into public fears. In my book, Beyond Fear, I discuss five different tendencies people have with evaluating risks:

* People exaggerate spectacular but rare risks and downplay common risks.

* People have trouble estimating risks for anything not exactly like their normal situation.

* Personified risks are perceived to be greater than anonymous risks.

* People underestimate risks they willingly take and overestimate risks in situations they can't control.

* People overestimate risks that are being talked about and remain an object of public scrutiny.

How many of the "security industries" specialise in using tactics based around these principles to sell their products?

Tags: , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 1:46 PM |

June 10, 2006

Hollywood and the hackers

This is an interesting interview between John Perry Barlow of the EFF and Dan Glickman of the MPAA here on the BBC website.

The fact of the matter is that people who create content for movies and television have to make a profit. If they don't you won't see all this wonderful stuff and listen to it.
Quote: "all this wonderful stuff"

Has this man actually WATCHED the rubbish that is being pumped out of Hollywood these days?

Remixes of comic books that were crap in the first place, sexist ultra-violent trash designed for people who are 14 years old in mind or body, yet another sequel of yet another film that was a pile of stinking ordure in the first place but has a "bankable" star and a plot a demented 6 year old toddler on acid might have written.

I wouldn't pirate any of their crap even if they paid me - seriously - I can wander down the rental shop and plonk down some spare change on a film I might like - but to waste my time watching Hollywood rubbish just because some people choose to fill up p2p file sharing networks with it - no thank you.

Meanwhile all the "electronic Hezbollah" who Perry Barlow claims, are not "copying and distributing movies not because they care about seeing the movies" but "because they want to stick it to the movie business." are helping big media, big business and the government to call for stronger and stronger restrictions on what we can do on the Internet.

SoI am caught in the middle of an Internet sluggish because of p2p film sharing of films that are rubbish anyhow and also I get an Internet becuase its more restricted because of all the p2p file sharing of films that I never want to see - a classic no-win situation for anyone who doesn't engage in copyright violation via the Internet.

Welcome to the 21st Century web where the battle is between the promotors of rubbish and the promotors of the fair rights of people to watch that rubbish.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 2:00 PM |

June 6, 2006

DJ Mixes "illegal music"

DJ Mixes "more than anything else that we see in illegal
music are DJ mixes"

These unique circumstances, the expert testified, made these pirated CDs "very easily identified." "Sometimes they are sophisticated," he said, "these were not." He was "absolutely" certain these CDs could be identified as pirated "DJ mixes" from a visual observation. In the black market, "probably more than anything else that we see in illegal music are DJ mixes."
I would believe this if all the DJ mixes in the world were made of tunes from companies that support the RIAA - i.e the multi-media payola manufactured pop-crud which is rammed down the throat of every human being on the planet.

They aren't.

They are compiled by DJs from vinyl records (remember vinyl - how cds would replace it forever - it didn't happen) made by small record labels who are only too happy for their music to be promoted in this way.

DJ's do not play the kind of music that the RIAA claim to support - it is too cutting edge and different for mainstream companies to buy into and promote - so it is left to the small independents who understand very well the role of DJ's in promoting their music and allow a certain latitude with home-brew cd-r's that promote the DJ or a particular club night.

If the DJ wants to cut a deal and release the mix - then the music has to be licensed - after all it is being resold at a profit.

Penalising DJ promos by categorising them as "pirate material" - rather than looking at the overall role of the DJ in promoting tunes and generating profit for the record companies by generating sales - is a little bit more of that "golden goose" killing strategy that threatens to make all our lives more difficult.

On another note - the RIAA should learn that (a) many third world countries package their cds in "slimline" cases, (b) many DJ's repackage their cds in "slim line" cases (you get 100 in a 50 bag) and (c) many record producers and musicians carry their demos and working material in "slim line" cases (yeah - the guys you are claiming to "protect") without infringing copyright laws

Arguing that "slim line" cases are a sure sign of "pirated" material is a great way to alienate - well almost everyone really.

Right now I am in the middle of reviewing CC material for a CD mix which will be given away free under CC also - I will ensure that I use a "slim line" case, I will ask a Photoshop expert to blur the cover so it looks like it has been "re-scanned" and then I will give them away free to anyone who ensures that they make at least 5 copies - which have to be distributed in a "slim line" case and with a cover that is blurry enough to arouse the suspicions of law enforcement officers .....

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Posted by Dr. K at 3:15 PM | | Comments (1)