Memex 1.1

Would software diversity be any more secure than the Microsoft monoculture?

Interesting article by Pete Lindstrom criticising the paper Cyber-insecurity — the cost of monopoly by Dan Geer, Bruce Schneier, Becky Bace and other security experts which argued that the dominance of Microsoft made the world unnecessarily insecure.

Surgical examination of Steve Ballmer’s claim that Linux is more insecure than Windows

Why people take Steve Ballmer seriously is a mystery, given that he talks more hooey than any other living Chief Executive. But recently he resumed ranting about the ‘security’ of Microsoft products relative to Open Source software. Thanks to Groklaw for this interesting rebuttal.

Computer viruses are 20 years old this week

Well, according to BBC Online they are anyway. Quote:

“US student Fred Cohen was behind the first documented virus that was created as an experiment in computer security.

Now there are almost 60,000 viruses in existence and they have gone from being a nuisance to a permanent menace.

Virus writers have adapted to new technology as it has emerged and the most virulent programs use the net to find new victims and cause havoc. Mr Cohen created his first virus when studying for a PhD at the University of Southern California.

Others had written about the potential for creating pernicious programs but Mr Cohen was the first to demonstrate a working example.

In the paper describing his work he defined a virus as “a program that can ‘infect’ other programs by modifying them to include a … version of itself”.

Mr Cohen added his virus to a graphics program called VD that was written for a make of mini-computer called a Vax.”

Gosh! I used to use a VAX. Which reminds me, did I ever tell you what I did in the Boer War…?.

Things to do when the boss is away

http://www.statusq.org/gems/things2.mpg

(thanks to Quentin for this. I missed it first time around).

The bar-code is dead, courtesy of Wal-Mart. It’ll be a RFID world from now on

Anyone who doubts that we will soon be living in a RFID-tagged world should read this report from the NYT. Quote:

“Some consumer products companies will have to invest millions of dollars to comply with Wal-Mart’s drive to have every carton and palette it receives carry a radio identification tag, according to a report to be released today by A. T. Kearney, a consulting firm.

“It’s a big item that most of them have not budgeted for,” said David Dannon, vice president for the consumer industries and retail products practice at Kearney, a Chicago-based subsidiary of Electronic Data Services.

The technology, known as radio-frequency identification, or RFID, has been used to track containers on trains and ships and in automatic toll systems like E-ZPass. In its new form, it is seen as the long-term successor to bar codes in the retail industry. Radio tags can carry more information about the product, can be scanned more rapidly and can be found even if they are hidden in cartons or behind other products.

Wal-Mart said in June that it expected its top 100 suppliers to adopt the technology by the end of 2004 and the rest of its suppliers to do so in 2005. In late September, the Department of Defense said it would also require major suppliers to use such tags by the end of 2004.”

The Times story is all about the cost to companies of investing in this new technology. But the real cost will be a social one because RFID offers unimaginable opportunities for surveillance — as I discussed some time ago here and here.

Courses in Cyberculture

Very useful list put together by David Silver at University of Washington.

That famous Ridley Scott Apple ’1984′ ad…

… can be downloaded from here.

Genius loci

Passing through Grantchester the other day, I caught this glimpse of the Mill House.

Apart from the fact that it was another beautiful Autumn day, what’s the significance of this? Answer: it’s the house in which Bertrand Russell lived when writing (with A.N. Whitehead) Principia Mathematica. There’s a wonderful photograph somewhere of Russell delivering the manuscript of the book to Cambridge University Press — in a wheelbarrow. The tragedy is that nowadays most people associate Grantchester not with mathematics but with the deservedly minor poet, Rupert Brooke (Stands the village clock at ten to three/ And is there honey still for tea?), or — worse — the unspeakable ‘novelist’, Jeffrey Archer, who has a house in the village, though mercifully is rarely seen there nowadays.

Automated gender detection

There was a lovely piece by Alexander Chancellor in today’s Guardian about an algorithm that, when supplied with a sample of text, can predict (with 80% accuracy) the gender of the author. A simplified implementation of the algorithm is available on the Web. Chancellor found that the algorithm thinks that most of the female columnists on the Guardian are men. I tried it with two samples of my writing — one taken from my book about the history of the Net, the other from an email message to a friend. The algorithm concluded that the first had been written by a man, the second by a woman. Hmmm…

So why did WIPO cancel its meeting on Open Source software?

Good Editorial in The Register. Quote:

“WIPO is an international organisation dedicated to promoting the use and protection of works of the human spirit. These works – intellectual property – are expanding the bounds of science and technology and enriching the world of the arts. Through its work, WIPO plays an important role in enhancing the quality and enjoyment of life and helps create real wealth for nations.

Given its background and mandate it is surprising that it scrapped its first meeting on “open and collaborative” projects such as “open source software.” After all open source software does, indeed rely on intellectual property rights. It cannot exist without them. It is, therefore, bemusing that the US Director of International Relations for the US Patent and Trademark Office apparently opposed such a meeting, claiming that such a meeting would run against the mission of WIPO to promote intellectual property rights. At least one of the major US software companies, probably beginning with the letter “M”, is reported to have lobbied against the holding of such a meeting.

It is curious that WIPO should have acceded to such “requests”. It is even more surprising that a USA Government Agency should so manifestly promote such views, at least in such a clumsy and unsophisticated way. It is even more surprising that WIPO acceded to such demands, if, indeed, these were the reasons for “scrapping” such a meeting.

Leaving aside the demand by commercial organisations for so called “open source” software products, governments, government organisations and agencies are increasingly seeking open source software products as cheaper alternatives to commercial software products, ultimately to the benefit of nations’ taxpayers. So WIPO why did you scrap this meeting?”