It saddens me that America’s so-called government for the people, by the people, and of the people has less compassion and enlightenment toward their fellow man than a corporation. Having been a party myself to subsequent legal bullying by other entities, I am all too familiar with how ugly and gut-wrenching a high-stakes lawsuit can be. Fortunately, the stakes in my cases were not as high, nor my adversaries as formidable as Aaron’s, otherwise I too might have succumbed to hopelessness and fear. A few years ago, I started rebuilding my life overseas, and I find a quantum of solace in the thought that my residence abroad makes it a little more difficult to be served.
Bunnie Huang, “A Moment of Silence for Aaron Swartz”
Author: Christopher Parsons
Policy wonk. Torontonian. Photographer. Not necessarily in that order.
Via the Washington Post:
“You have potentially millions of Androids making their way into the work space, accessing confidential documents,” said Christopher Soghoian, a former Federal Trade Commission technology expert who now works for the ACLU. “It’s like a really dry forest, and it’s just waiting for a match.”
The high degrees of fragmentation in the Android ecosystem are incredibly problematic; fragmentation combined with delays in providing updates effectively externalizes the security-related problems stemming from mobile OS vulnerabilities on individual owners of phones. Those owners are (typically) the least able parties in the owner/carrier/manufacturer/OS creator relationship to remedy the flaws. At the moment, Google tends to promptly (try) to respond to flaws. The manufacturers and vendors then have to certify and process any updates, which can take months. It’s inexcusable that these parties can not only sit on OS updates, but they can continue to knowingly sell vulnerable phones.
Imagine if, after a car line was reported to have some problem that required the line’s recall and refurbishment, dealers continued to sell the car. They didn’t even notify the person buying the car that there was a problem, just that ‘enhancements’ (i.e. the seat didn’t eject when you hit something at 60Km/hr, plus a cool new clock display on the dashboard) were coming. The dealers would be subject to some kind of legal action or, failing that, consumers could choose to work with dealers who sold safe cars. Why, exactly, aren’t phone carriers being subjected to the same scrutiny and held to the same safety standards?
On Choosing a Maiden Name
Credit card company: What’s your mother’s maiden name? Me: Donkey Kong Bumper Boat. Them: Uh, yes. What? Me: I’m in security.
Steve Werby (@stevewerby) February 7, 2013
Marketing: Confusion
![]()
Now the Microsoft Surfaces make sense. One’s for play and work, while the other… wait.
photo via Jonathan Hoover
Marketing: Confusion.
Dial-up handshaking illustrated
![]()
Packets of Death
very nice detective work, in which we discover that a single ill-favored packet can completely kill certain Intel gigabit NICs (to the point that a power cycle is required to resurrect them). Excellent writeup (and I discovered a new tool: open source packet generation suite Ostinato, which aims to be “wireshark in reverse”).
The significance, via Slashdot: “With a modified HTTP server configured to generate the data at byte value (based on headers, host, etc) you could easily configure an HTTP 200 response to contain the packet of death and kill client machines behind firewalls!”
The supposed ban is meant to, in part, crack-down on cyberbullying. To be clear, such bullying is serious, but introducing security deficits into smartphones – for the children! – really isn’t the way to solve this social problem. You don’t solve social ills by turning to technological filters and blocks. Especially not when trying to get between a teenager and porn.
Quote of the month
From Warren McCulloch, one of the founding fathers of cybernetics:
“I don’t particularly like people, never have. Man to my mind is about the nastiest, most destructive of all animals. I don’t see any reason, if he can evolve machines that can have more fun than he himself can, why they shouldn’t take over, enslave us, quite happily. They might have a lot more fun, invent better games than we ever did.”
quoted in Mary Catherine Bateson, Our Own Metaphor (New York: Knopf, 1972)
Techno-utopianism (dystopianism?) for the win.
I have this seminar I’m running for free for college students and I’m going to show them this picture before we start. It’s a picture of someone graduating from college. You can’t tell, but you can guess that they’re probably $150,000 in debt. Written on the top of their mortarboard with masking tape it says, “Hire me.” The thing about the picture that’s pathetic, beyond the notion that you need to spam the audience at graduation with a note saying you’re looking for a job, is that you went $150,000 in debt and spent four years of your life so someone else could pick you. That’s ridiculous. It really makes me sad to see that.
While I understand what Seth Godin is suggesting, I also think that it’s largely reflective of his incredibly privileged position. When people are leaving schools with that amount of debt, with knowledge that they want to start a family and not suffer (total) financial ruin by starting something and failing, then those individuals may quite reasonably want full-time regular employment.
Godin’s most common response is that ‘such employment doesn’t really exist anymore – so adapt!’ While it’s a great response for some people who are willing to take on heightened risks in their lives it isn’t one that ought to be imposed on all individuals. Moreover, the thought that it’s “ridiculous” to want to be picked and work at a meaningful job and launch a career with a business that is compatible with your training and expertise shouldn’t make anyone sad. Instead, what should be “sad” is that such aspirations are less and less likely to be realized as companies abandon long-term commitment to employees and instead harden their ‘flexible’ hiring strategies that facilitate profits at the expense of human life.