On the NSA, Security and Privacy on the Internet

A lot of terrifyingly smart people have written extensively about the impact Snowden revelations about the NSA spying on what appears to be basically everyone in the world, including the citizens on the United States.

My thoughts on the subject are fairly predictable, but once again I’m struck by the prescience demonstrated in Neal Stephenson’s amazing Cryptonomicon. I first read it shortly after it was published in 1999, and while I loved the techno-thriller aspects of the story, I didn’t really understand the scope of some of the more political issues.

Having just re-read the book, I thought the following paragraph was particularly relevant when considering what is happening now:

Many Net partisans are convinced that the Net is robust because its lines of communication are spread evenly across the planet. In fact, as you can see from this graphic, nearly all intercontinental Web traffic passes through a small number of choke-points. Typically these choke-points are controlled and monitored by local governments. Clearly, then, any Internet application that wants to stand free of governmental interference is undermined, from the very beginning, by a fundamental structure problem.

On New Entrepreneurialism

[This post is a work in progress and is not finished]

I just got back from an Entrepreneurs Lunch at PwC, the title of which was “Offshoring & Outsourcing Lunch with Scott Linden Jones & Mike O’Hagan”. I’ve been to a few PwC events; they’re always well organised and very interesting, but this is the first one I’ve walked out of thoroughly depressed.

On the surface, it might seem like it’s just because I co-founded a Brisbane-based software development company and I’m worried about overseas developers eating our lunch. That is certainly true, but it’s not the whole reason I came out of the event wanting to go straight to a pub and cry into a pint. Outsourcing software development is nothing new; we feel that the value we add by being an on shore solution more than makes up for the difference in price. (And of course, some places that offshore custom development aren’t super interested in passing on the cost savings back to their clients.)

The main reason was that I was disappointed about this ‘New Entrepreneurialism’. At an entrepreneurs lunch, the main focus on being entrepreneurial was basically stripping an existing business down to its component parts, identifying the bits that could be easily compartmentalised, and then figuring out how to make people overseas do them for a fraction of the cost.

Anyone that’s spent any time on developer/tech-heavy communities, especially American ones – like Slashdot – will have seen complaints about this sort of thing before. Developers in large companies that have been doing outsourcing for a while seem to have seen this sort of process a lot, and usually end up blaming “the MBAs” for gutting the company, sending jobs to India or China, and generally making their lives suck.

So this technique isn’t new. Mike O’Hagan, the owner of the moving company Mini Movers and one of the speakers, acknowledged this. Outsourcing is something that the big companies have been doing for ages, but thanks to the Internet removing some of those barriers and increasing access to this global employment market, things have changed and now small companies can take advantage of it as well.

This is all well and good – but it this really what entrepreneurial activity looks like now? Outsourcing some business processes to third world economies and calling it “entrepreneurship” (a word which I’ve always hated) feels like it’s missing the point to me.

[ NOTES TO FINISH WRITING UP]:

  • irony of entrepreneurs all doing the same thing, instead of something new
  • Mike’s talk
    – security not a concern? what about customer data/privacy in outsourced environments?
    – noted corruption is a problem (no solution)
    – need to know who to go with
    – “same problem in Australia” with a bag full of money
    – political issues in Australia – no plan to deal with “high minimum wage”
    – Economics of outsourcing
    – prices already increasing in some outsourcing markets (implication that this sucks and is unfair and is going to mean they’re going to have to outsource their outsourcing when it gets too much and they can find a cheaper country)

Scott’s talk
– Quality of outsourced work has not been an issue (… based on one anecdote?!)
– No real data presented (many people have good stories of outsourcing success but just as obviously, but many don’t)

Other points to note:

  • Equilibrium will be probably be restored over time as markets evolve and cheaper outsourcing markets develop & become more “first-worldy”
  • Some links about offshoring as references:
    • http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=2145233#r14
    • http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4091369&cid=44570995

Excellent Guide to Logical Fallacies

A Dr. Michael C. LaBossiere of ‘The Internet‘ has created an excellent e-book (except it’s in PDF) which details 42 common logical fallacies, including some of these classics:

Ad Hominem
Appeal to Authority
Appeal to Emotion
Appeal to Fear
Begging the Question
Guilt by Association
Poisoning the Well
Red Herring
Slippery Slope
Spotlight
Straw Man
Two Wrongs Make a Right

Having spent the best part of the last 10 years or so arguing with people on forums, I feel pretty silly realising only in the last year or so that most of the common arguing techniques actually have been formally classified in this way. Since realising that, it has made arguing on the Internet so much easier.

I’ve copied the e-book (redistribution is allowed), so if you’re interested in expanding your ability to argue on the Internet, it is definitely worth a read. Download it here!

On Government Secrets

I thought this post was great, in the Slashdot thread about Julian Assange, the (Australian!) man behind Wikileaks:

Secrecy is entrusted to the government on the assumption that it will only be used when truly needed.

However the same power can be and is abused to subvert the freedom of its own people, as misappropriation for personal gain by powerful people and used to cover up ineffective, improper, illegal or immoral activity.

Whistle blowers object to these abuses and fight against it in the only way possible, by removing the shroud of secrecy and revealing these violations of trust to the public.

Mistakes may be made, but revealing the abuse of trust by the government is vital to the continuation of freedom and democracy.

Source – user Nadaka. I Googled the text and it seems to be original, not a quote – I thought it was a good, concise summary about why Wikileaks is handy.

Lost: iPod Touch at GDC

While at the Games Developers Conference, I have lost my beloved iPod touch in the vicinity of the St Regis Hotel in San Francisco, in the area of 3rd and Mission Streets. If anyone has found it or finds it later, please let me know!@#

It is in a loose-fitting black silicon case. The front picture is a Parisian rooftop, though the battery is probably flat by now.

I desperately would like to get it back for the plane ride home so I can use it for reading and playing Sudoku.

The Monty Hall Problem is not the same as Deal or No Deal

My brother and our mate spent about four hours on Monday night running through the Monty Hall Problem trying to wrap our heads around the numbers. My brother was convinced that Deal or No Deal was the same problem as Monty Hall. Our mate was convinced otherwise; I tended to agree with him based on my initial thoughts, but having some experience with the weird unintuitive nature of the Monty Hall Problem I deferred a decision until I’d thought about it some more.

This culminated in the creation of some PHP scripts to run a few zillion trials of both problems. The one for Deal or No Deal was quite simple to conceive and it seemed pretty clear almost straight away that it was not the same thing, especially after I started working on the Monty Hall version. Fortunately I found someone else had already done it in PHP so I just played with that.

Anyway, it’s probably obvious to anyone that knows a lot about conditional probability, but they’re not the same problem.

If anyone cares, the PHP script for the Deal or No Deal stuff is up here.

Revision3 Content Creative Commons Status Confirmed

Revision3 got back to me and have confirmed that their content is still indeed released under a Creative Commons license.

It should be noted again though that redistribution of their “early access” releases – the shows made available for subscribers – is still strictly forbidden by their license agreement. In the interests of keeping the free content coming it’s obviously in everyone’s best interests to respect this policy.

Revision3 and the Missing Creative Commons Logo

Revision3.com is one of the biggest content creators in the burgeoning “Internet TV” market. They create and distribute a variety of popular shows, including Diggnation (as in digg.com, the pervasive social bookmarking site), PixelPerfect, Internet Superstar, and many others.

The Revision3.com site originally sported the Creative Commons logo – you might’ve seen it around:

This logo implies that the works on the site are made available under a Creative Commons license. While there are several different types of CC licenses, the most commonly used license is one that allows redistribution of content. This is extremely handy for us in Australia, as it means ISPs can easily mirror their content to make it available for their users usage-free. This is kind of a big deal, as any Australian broadband user will tell you, and I suspect will become a bigger deal for people in the US as they clamp down more on wild bandwidth usage.

Recently the site got a big overhaul – I don’t know when; I only visit it every couple months when I see they have a new show, and the Wayback Machine only goes back to August 2007.

Conspicuously absent from the new design – the Creative Commons logo.

Closer inspection also reveals the Creative Commons information is now not available in their content RSS feeds. I am not sure if it ever was, but I have a vague recollection it used to be – backed up by the fact that the RSS XML includes a references to a Creative Commons namespace. However, the feed doesn’t appear to be using that namespace at all – there’s no license applied to the relevant sections of the RSS document.

Some Googling also reveals that there has been a bit of angst from the Revision3 guys towards redistribution – part of their revenue model is to make episodes available early via a private access system to paying subscribers. However, it seems some dastardly types would get those early release videos and then distribute them publicly, citing the Creative Commons as their reason for doing so. Legal issues aside, it’s obviously a douchebag thing to do, and it’s unsurprising that Revision3 took legal action to try and stamp it out.

A quick read of the the Terms of use for the revision3.com site doesn’t really mention much about the content. It does specifically mention that you can’t redistribute “member only, not publicly released downloads” – hopefully putting a stop to people leaking those subscriber-only early access videos.

There’s one reference to Creative Commons:

By uploading, submitting or otherwise disclosing or distributing Content of any kind at or on the Site or otherwise through the Services, unless source quoted, you represent and warrant that you own all rights in the Content and you agree that the Content will be subject to the Creative Commons Public Domain License, available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/. All of our non-member downloads comply with creative commons 2.5.

(Emphasis mine).

This raises the question of what exactly constitues “non-member downloads”. It seems that is it probably the video content that we’re after, but it’s just a little bit too vague, especially in the context of a legal agreement.

The current situation and the net result of the above is that, at least to my eyes, the licensing of the Revision3 content is now more nebulous than it was previously, simply because of the removal of the Creative Commons logo.

While it is possible that they’re trying to distance themselves from the Creative Commons license with a view to better control and accounting of the distribution of their content, it seems that this is. It’d also be a huge shame, because it would probably dramatically decrease their audience, the size of which is arguably a direct result of their distribution model.

Last week I emailed Revision3’s official contact address to try and clarify this position – as yet I haven’t received a reply, so I have emailed them again today (from a different address, in case spam filtering was an issue) and I have also posed the same question publicly on their forums.

Linksys WAG325N Hardware Problems

A follow-up to my earlier post about problems with the Linksys WAG325N ADSL modem device – after going through a couple of hours of Live Chat with the Linksys team, they have finally admitted defeat and asked me to send it back in, as it seems a hardware fault is responsible for at least the 10mbit fallback problem.

Several other users are still reporting the problems; some have also sent theirs back only to get another faulty unit and have to send it back again – so hopefully at some point in the process we’ll end up getting working units.

I am hoping there’s just a bad batch of these things out there and it’s a relatively simple hardware fault that can be magically fixed. This is my first time buying Linksys hardware so needless to say I’m a little disappointed; I’m especially not looking forward to sending this back and being without a modem/switch/wifi device for the duration.