there’s a 20 percent chance we’re living in a computer simulation

click image for NY Times Piece

Definition of Irony: Justine Ezarik's iPhone Bill

Sexy Mobos

The Back of the Motherboard of the new iMac (see the ports):

Are YOU ready for Linux?

It seems everyday there's a new article about Linux and it's readiness to replace Windows. The fact is, it already does. It's an operating system. By default it can replace Windows. The question is: are users ready to switch?

When I switched to using OS X on a Mac, I wasn't looking for the start menu or trying to find the control panel. I was learning how to do things the "Mac" way. Sure, it took a few days to get the hang of but what could I expect, it's a different OS made by different people with different goals. However, I don't see countless articles about OS X's "readiness" to replace Windows.

Linux is ready to be used by anyone willing to learn a different way of doing things. I will admit that it's not as intuitive (initially) as either Windows or OS X but that does not negate it's usefulness. It took me much longer to get used to using Linux than any other system but I wanted to learn to harness the power it has to offer.

The command line is scary at first, I admit. Though once I got used to it, It became quite a productivity tool for me (it also makes me feel like a hacker of some sort). Installing programs was confusing at first but now I browse through thousands of software titles and install with a simple mouse click. You can even install multiple programs at once. If I know the name of the program I want to install, I type a short command in the terminal and off it goes finding the program, resolving dependencies and installing the program for me. Once installed, it's automatically categorized in my application menu, ready to use. To top it off, the system automatically keeps EVERY single program on my computer up to date. It seems to have paid off to have spent a little time getting to know the system. I argue that this is the easiest and most dynamic way of dealing with the installation of programs there is. It just requires me to learn a new method.

Most people don't understand the concept of a desktop environment because they're not given a choice so it's not worth mentioning. In OS X, the desktop environment is called Aqua, I believe Windows XP's is called Redmond and I'm not exactly sure what Vista uses (is it Aero, or is that just the name for the fancy effects, not sure but it's a moot point). Linux offers a choice of several different desktops. Gnome and KDE being the most popular. The specifics of the desktop environment is beyond the scope of this article but basically, a desktop environment can be described as the OS's GUI. This new choice being offered is hard to understand at first but once you do, it gives you freedom to choose.

Windows has always tried to be an operating system for the non-techie (one might argue that the skills required just to keep the thing running without viruses or spyware defeats this goal). Linux is for people who want something more powerful, customizeable and just plain different. I'm not going to tell you that system A is better than system B. I have my opinion and I'm sure you have yours. Please stop arguing about Linux's readiness to be used by the general public.

If you don't want to learn how to use Linux, you're not ready to use that particular IT, not the other way around.

You already know the downsides of using Windows. Are they enough to cause you to switch, or is the fear of change too great to overcome? Either way, Linux is ready and has been. Are you?

Other articles of interest on this subject:
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

Wisdom vs. Crowds

In this new era of the web (web 2.0 for the trend whores), we've come to adopt the ideology of the wisdom of crowd. The democracy of information brings excitement to tired old models of media like couples making love in public, being aroused by the fear of being caught. Akin to the love movement of the sixties, the social outcry seems to be damn the man and power to the people. The truth is, social wisdom is only an echo of innovation and not it's source. A crowd is the distribution system of wisdom. The idea that information wants to be free is to say that ignorance seeks enlightenment. For example, the concept of electricity is commonly understood and taken for granted in the modern age; but not so long ago it was only a theory in the minds of a few brave lunatics willing to ignore the crowds of people informing them of it's impossibilities. In fact, historically crowds are the last thing accused of being wise. If crowds were wise, the holocaust may never have happened and elections would be unanimous. The thing is, we all like to think that great ideas were our own. Common sense is a way of saying "I could of thought of that". Crowds seem wise because when an individual thinks outside the box and discovers new avenues of thought, the crowd quickly latches on resounding the notion as if it were their own. The crowd takes credit, not willing to admit their ignorance. But make no mistake, there is always an individual at the heart of the movement. The very nature of a crowd is to repeat mantras and subscribe whole heartedly to prepackaged doctrines, shunning outsiders for not agreeing with the majority. I don't mean to tear down the idea of social awareness. I would just like to point out that giving too much credit to what the majority says brings with it the damnation of innovation. Popular opinion is always something to be considered, but wholesale adoption of public belief will keep you from truly finding your own path and possibly from sharing a lesson learned to your fellow man. The only wisdom to be found in the crowd is in the debate, and in finding your own voice within it.

A Warning to Web Developers about "Premature Ajax-ulation"

Interest in Ajax is sky-high and only continues to grow. Unfortunately, far too many people rush into Ajax development without giving proper consideration to security issues. These unfortunate individuals suffer from the most embarrassing of security issues: "Premature Ajax-ulation."

More: Ars Tech, Black Hat USA 2007

Texting Google.

Google makes itself pretty darn accessible from a mobile phone! You can interact with many of their services via SMS or "short messaging service"

What's really cool is that you can query their search engine and more without ever needing to fire-up a mobile web-browser. I like to think of SMS as the command line of your mobile computing experience. There's a certain elegance in it's simplicity.

Text your Search to "466453"

(spells "Google" on most devices)

A couple of tips & cool search commands/shortcuts:

• To perform a local search, text the keyword of what you want to find (e.g. Bars, Night Clubs, Pizza, etc) followed by the location (name of city, or more specifically, zip code) You can separate business and location by using a period, space, or comma, but google recommends a period for accuracy (Ginos Pizza.Chicago -vs- Gino's Pizza Chicago)

• "D" before a word is the "Define" operator - (Easier then searching dictionary.com from a mobile browser)

• "W" before a location (city, town, ZIP) is the "Weather" query operator -(A fast forecast)

• Calculator also works. This is probably moot since most Cell phones worth their salt have a calculator in them, but if you don't and you're in need, just "text" your equation to Google and you'll get the answer right back. Works for Currency / Metric Conversions as well (e.g. 1 US pint in liters, 8 USD in Yen) Pretty slick!

There's a list of more commands + a really cool "demo" of how it works with a little onscreen cell phone interface here.

There's also been some really good stuff in Lifehacker on checking & updating your Google Calendar via SMS too.

Not your average drug bust

Ever wonder what 207 million dollars in cash looks like?


This cash horde was captured by Mexico City Police from a drug kingpin. Great story by my favorite online News site Washington Post. Almost reads like something from Tarantino

Digg the Story

SMS/Text Messages on the Mirror.

For the creepy rich dude whose wife tells him the ringer is off, all the time:



Interested in getting Text Messages on your mirror? Well for a limited time and quantity you can. The low, low price of $10,000.

100 Bloggers' Portaits in ASCII Art.

This is cool. 100 Bloggers Portraits in ASCII art. Go here to see. Click on the individual to see large image of in ASII.

Can't find the remote?

The remote gets lost quite a bit in my house so this set up would be a nice Wii-like fall back:



Don't thank me, thank the team of Aussie scientists that came up with it. There's actually seven gestures including the ability to control volume, turn on a DVD player and more.

I'll forgo the urge to make some jokes about the types of gestures and actions you could use and let anyone who want's to do so by leaving a comment below ;-)

Simplify sharing iTunes Libraries over the web using Simplify

There's an effortless new way to share iTunes libraries over the web. It's called Simplify.

The name is perfect because it's so easy. You only have to download a 4MB software package that takes less than a minute (available for either Mac or PC's of course) and it seems to really work like a charm. You send an invitation and/or accept one and 2-3 people can share the libraries simultaneously. Or you could could listen to your home music library at work. The whole thing has the Mac simple and elegant look, feel, and implementation!

I am using it as I'm posting this. My musician friend has a much more extensive library than I do, and it's just like Im listening to my own locally right inside of my own iTunes.

The service appears to relatively new, but there is another very favorable review of it here at the "StartupSquad" blog. You can't burn or download anything, just stream it, so it's totally legal. That means you can share DRM protected stuff too. Like pownce, this is another hot "trusted friend" kind of social web-app.

iPhone dust and the lighter side of blogging.

Considering the need for personal branding and the advice of Jakob Nielsen on putting out well-written, comprehensive articles vs. short-form, quick and dirty "blog posts," I logged into to blogger today with every intention of drafting a thoughtful and detailed analysis of eventcasting and why it's really more of an evolutionary application of technology - opposed to "revolutionary" one.

Instead, internet-ADD took over and I found this which is probably far more entertaining anyway:



yes, it is on ebay. the current bid is for as much as functional iPhone...but hey...you get a blender. Very Nice.

Google gets sue happy against Microsoft.

Google raises Microsoft antitrust concern (say what?)

The Search giant has filed a confidential complaint with the Department of Justice, asking that Microsoft be forced to alter Vista's desktop search behavior on anti-trust grounds.

Google spokesperson Ricardo Reyes said Microsoft's "current approach with Vista desktop search violates the consent decree and and limits consumer choice." He added, "The search boxes built throughout Vista are hard-wired to Microsoft's own desktop search product, with no way for users to choose an alternate provider from these visible search access points. Likewise, Vista makes it impractical to turn off Microsoft's search index."

Here's the irony:
The DOJ under Bush is generally a friend to Microsoft. At the Federal level, they do NOT want to pursue this. The States' AGs may want to though...

Japanese Government Promoting Easier Distrbution of Video Content

In a move to bolster the promotion of TV and Video content to the web, a Japanese government panel is recommending that regulations be changed to allow webmasters to upload video content without first having to get permission from all rights holders.

The government is not advocating the theft -or- unauthorized use of content as their proposed regulations call for webmasters to ensure that the rights holder's receive royalty payments for their webcast content.

Current regulations surrounding content / intellectual property are quite cumbersome in Japan and this rule change is part of a broader efforts to reform all Intellectual property laws there while maintaining fairness for rights holder's. The effort is being led by Japan's Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe.


All I can say is "Way to go, Japan!!" The US Government and their ridiculously laughable efforts at legislating Digital Rights Management / Intellectual Property Reform could learn a great deal from this kind of open, yet fair approach!!!


Technorati Tags: DRM, Japan, Intellectual Property, Openess, Internet, TV, Regulation

Afterthoughts on the Digg.com takeover and response

(this is a cross post from my other blog - thesocialbookmarker.com - something I normally don't do, but wanted to share here also)

I had told myself that I was not going to write about the temporary Digg.com takeover and subsequent capitulation (since nearly THE ENTIRE BLOGESPHERE has pretty much already beaten it to death), but after having a nice phone conversation with a good friend of mine last night, I thought I would summarize some of my thoughts about it here.

Clearly, I'm all about the whole "wisdom of crowds" (even though it's often NOT wise) & this grand social experiment in news gathering, relevancy, and more. Furthermore, I am a big fan of the FSF, the GNU project, and the "creative disruption" that comes with technological advance and free information. You might think that I would've been one participating & cheering the whole thing on, or decrying Digg's initial actions, and finally as some are, criticizing them for "caving" only after their site had been overrun by its users. But I honestly don't feel that way at all and here's why:

Democracy =| Anarchy.

Digg.com is an awesome site that lets users generate, moderate, and determine what's on it's site - within their Terms of Service. (Ahhh, those pesky rules.) Now, You may not agree with them or their implementation - and that's fair game, but it is a *company* with employees, costs, and much more. It's their right to have a T.O.S -or- some rules in place for how they run their site and thus business.

That being said, here is my only constructive criticism /feedback: I don't think Digg.com can or should be held -or try to hold themselves- legally responsible for user-submitted links to any "Intellectual Property" - so long as it's not in the story description or headline. This is the distinction between them and say YouTube. YouTube is in trouble & being sued because they are hosting and serving copyrighted material. Digg.com is a site that displays links and descriptions to other sites - BIG DISTINCTION. The perception (and/or reality depending on your viewpoint) was that Digg was going a little too far in trying to "censor" what users were submitting -- when they could've handled it in a different way.

No court or judge could reasonably expect them to know and monitor all the content displayed on sites that their's links too!! They could be expected to make "reasonable best efforts" to prevent piracy, but basically that would just mean "No direct display of copyrighted material/ intellectual property" DIRECTLY on their site. They could've even explained this on their blog. Something like, "We can't control what you guys digg (link too), but don't be stupid and blatantly infringe copyrights in your headlines & descriptions, because it could get us shut down - so we'll ban you if you do!"

It's all a moot point now, since Kevin went ahead and posted the key to the Digg blog. Like Dr. Tiki, I think they deserve some credit for listening to their users. They could have easily pulled the plug on the site for a few hours, or day or two and posted and explanation that they were in risk of being shut down. The kids and pranksters who were just rebelling and joining the mob would have lost interest and moved on. The hardcore diggers and users of the site would've stayed - and there still would've been plenty of publicity that would've brought new users to the site. (In fact, I'm sure since this whole "mess" a lot of new people have been attracted to the site and registered)

It's more than easy for me and everyone else to armchair quarterback & hindsight is always 20/20, but I do think these guys really need to think through some of these thorny 21st century issues from both the corporate AND hacker perspective, so that when something like this happens again, (and it will) they a legally defensible compromise that their intelligent user base will be able to understand with a ;-) and most importantly- prevent the site from being sued or taken down.

That way too, they won't have to stumble through a PR morass or appear to "cave", or much worse -put themselves at a real legal risk to prove they "get it". I know they do, and did, and that's why I'm now digging on...

The Periodicals That Aren't (Quite) Dead Yet...To Me

So Print Media is Dead, right? Well maybe it's withering away to online media, but still... nothing beats actually holding a magazine or newspaper in your hands, especially when you're stuck at the Dr's Office or Airport, etc.

Having been tagged by Perkonis on this, here are list of the fine periodicals I still read:

Wired Mag
Wall Street Journal (Print Edition)
The Economist
Cat Fancy

(Hey, I needed a forth and it's always fun to have one that's thrown in just as a gag....I mean what Blogger reads...Wired??)

I've been away so long it appears everyone has already rode this train, but here goes:

iJustine
Jason Calacanis
JohnFTM

Tag, You're It.

Our Internet Overlords...

Google is clamping down on paid Text-link ads (while they consolidate control over 85% of the online ad market through the DoubleClick acquisition)

Comcast is banning and kicking off "bandwidth hogs" (e.g. Joost & Video users) While they continue to very profitably grow HD & OnDemand video service AND take telephone phone subscribers from the Bell phone companies)

Why is it that 2 Net-Centric forward thinking and "creative disrupters" like Comcast and Google are staring to act, "evil" ?

Business x.0 is always just Business, I guess.

More on the Net, Neutrality, and it's finality.

The internet has been around since Sept. 2, 1969. That's when Leonard Kleinrock supervised the first exchange of data over ARPANET

Almost 40 years later, the Internet is carrying and supporting mindboggling amounts of information, and it is only increasing as more people get connected.

Some that have been there since the beginning, think it's crazy that it even works as well as it does (!)

It's not surprising that engineers want to re-tool the underlying infrastructure of the web, but increasingly researchers are calling for scrapping the entire thing! Many believe a "clean slate" approach is the only way to deal with the issues of mobility, security, and other challenges that have cropped up since Moore's Law started rolling down the global tack.

What is interesting to this blogger are some comments in the Yahoo/AP piece that were made by Google's "Colin Powell" of Net Public Relations, Mr. Vint Cerf. He wasn't quoted directly so his words may be tailored somewhat to make the authors point, but the inference is well...I'll just copy the quote and let you decide:

Even Vinton Cerf, one of the Internet's founding fathers as co-developer of the key communications techniques, said the exercise was "generally healthy" because the current technology "does not satisfy all needs."

I'm not saying TCP/IP ain't great because it is (I don't think anyone thinks it should be scrapped), but here's my question...

...on a philosophical level, the expectation to treat each packet equally is strained when it's acknowledged that the network doesn't satisfy all needs, isn't it?

Just sayin'....


Digg the Story.

On why Net Neutrality is stillborn and there will be no funeral.

I've come to the conclusion that the impassioned "Net Neutrality" topic is not only mutual hubris (from both sides of the issue) but a dead horse.

My gut feeling was validated last night when Robert X Cringely dropped his latest column, "We Don't Need No Stinking Best Effort: Net neutrality may have been just a fantasy all along."

In a nutshell, ISP's already give priority to certain packets (DNS for example, as they should -- we all want our pages to load faster), the cable company has already configured their network to give priority to VoIP (as they should -- you don't have to buy VoIP from them to get Net access, or television.) Beside that, the ISP's have a number of other tricks up their sleeves to throttle bandwidth either way- even in a ways that might seem to enforce Net Neutrality, but in reality might make the web slower!

Before you think I've lost my mind and turned trust over to the telco's & ISPs let me back up and put the whole "argument" in perspective: There is NO Neutral Ground in this battle. The players aren't even speaking to the same issues half the time. At the end of the day...It's all about who pays. The Content Providers or the Users. The content providers don't want to pay. By wrapping the issue up in emotion (and even legislation) safeguards are added against efforts to make them pay. My question, since this has become an emotional & misunderstood issue for the public at large is, how concerned are they about us paying more?

Google and it's faithful got spooked to shit, when they heard that Ed Whitacre, the CEO of AT&T, wanted to make Google pay him for generating traffic that passed over his wires. This comment was pure success (revenue) envy - it's a big stretch for AT&T to try and extract money from Google just for being a destination of their customers! If Google or any other content providers are cause for network congestion on a carriers network, it stands to reason that the carriers customers (you know, the ones already paying for the service) are the ones generating that traffic - regardless of what kind of traffic it is!

Packet Prioritization will find a way be neutral enough for the corporate proponents of Net Neutrality as long as they don't have to pay for it. We will, and we always do.

That's just the way it goes.