Toast442.org

According to this CNN article, unnamed execs at several music companies have started rumbling about moving up the prices for downloadable music. They claim that the 65 cents per song they are currently getting was set artificially low to stimulate demand. Strangely, they point to the ridiculous cost of ring-tone downloads as somehow justifying the a higher price.

What a bunch of bastards. Assuming that this is true (and the Financial Times is a pretty good source) you can see just how damn greedy these jerks are. They don’t have to manufacture any physical product. They don’t have to ship anything. There is no risk in merchandise being returned unsold, damaged, or stolen. They don’t even have to pay bandwidth costs. It’s practically pure profit, since they already made the album. For a typical album with 10 songs, this comes out to be about $6.50 the record companies are seeing. Not bad.

I know what they are realizing, though. I know why they want to raise the prices. Because they are no longer selling albums. People have finally got the choice to purchase individual songs, and they are taking advantage of it. Most albums suck - they contain one or two songs that I’d pay for and the rest is filler that I’ll probably listen to once or twice and then never again. So, people just get the one or two songs, and don’t even bother with the rest. So instead of their $6.50, they get get something like a $1.30.

That is the problem here - crap tunes and the record execs know it. Instead of making better music, they want to raise the price for the stuff that people will listen to. Typical response for an industry in the toilet, though. Don’t make your product better, just raise it’s price to keep the status quo. This rarely works for long.

Wired currently has an article that details what exactly was the fault of the T-Mobile system, at least for some of the crackers - a quite common application called WebLogic. In 2003, a vulnerability was found that would allow someone to read and write arbitrary files. A patch was immediately issued, but apparently no one at T-Mobile cared to actually apply it.

And so it goes. A cracker had access to complete customer records, SS numbers, the whole schmear, because someone didn’t pay attention to patches coming from their vendors. This is probably a good indicator of the pervasiveness of this problem however. If a large company with a (presumably) huge IT department running their systems can miss this, I wonder how many more open systems there are out there. With your data on it. Just waiting to be cracked.

So I finally gave in to the marketing hype and went and got myself a brand new 15″ PowerBook to replace my aging 1 Ghz. TiBook from a couple of years ago. It was still working well, but with no 802.11g and other niceties, it was time to move. I settled on the fully loaded 15″ w/superdrive, maxed memory (2 GB) and large hard drive. I skipped on the 128MB of VRAM and dual link DVI. Despite being a factory-only option, I really can’t see myself needing the ability to hook up to a 30″ flatscreen in the near future.

So I went over the nearest Apple store that had stock (in Denver) and plopped down some cash and walked out with an expensive black box. When I got home, I had the best computer upgrade experience ever. That migration tool that Apple now includes during setup completely rocks. It got all my apps and data - everything, moved over and completely running with only two exceptions - Stuffit needed reinstalling (and it even warned me that I had to do that step) and I had to reinstall the dev kit. Completely painless - I was up and fully running with all my stuff in under three hours - including the transfer of 69GB of data over firewire. Brilliant.

I’ve been watching over the past few weeks the raft of commentary and opinions from people in the whole Intelligent Design (ID) “debate.” I hesitate to call it a debate - it tends to lend credence to the ID proponent’s arguments in allowing people to think that there is a real scientific principal being discussed. This is a real danger, because despite the complete lack of evidence and a real theory of operation, ID is being pushed as an alternative to the theory of evolution (TTOE), and in some cases as something that complements TTOE. Unfortunately, the public picks up on this crap and thinks that this is something more than it is. An example:

From the The Wichita Daily Eagle, a letter to the editor from Jay Anderson reads in part:

But we tend to forget that almost any new scientific discovery is rejected by the majority of scientists of that day. Look at poor Galileo, who was forced to recant his ideas about astronomy because they were new.

I’d like to point out that it wasn’t other scientists that rejected Galileo’s new ideas - it was the church in Rome. Perhaps not the ideal example to illustrate the failure of scientists to recognize new ideas … but let’s continue.

Evolutionary science more than 20 years old is out of date with the advent of the discovery of the DNA molecule and its complexity, and the vast amount of information it contains — which can only be explained by an intelligent designer. The scientists who point this out have Ph.D.s in chemistry and genetics.

Mr. Anderson here fails to recognize that far from disproving TTOE, modern genetics is essential to evolutionary theory. Furthermore, while scientists (even ones with a Ph.D.!) may point to the “vast amount” of information in a DNA molecule, you’ll be hard pressed to find many reputable scientists pushing the idea that an “intelligent designer” was the one that put it there. (See this FAQ for more information on how many scientists really support ID.)

But it means nothing that the majority of scientists believe the old theories of evolution. They are too afraid to even look at the new evidence, which is what a true scientist is supposed to do.

I’m certain that should someone come along with some unambiguous evidence of ID, you would convert the vast majority of people overnight. The problem is that there just isn’t any evidence. It’s completely based on two ideas: 1. That life is too complex to to have happened by “chance” - it needs some sort of helping hand from an intelligent being; and 2. TTOE is wrong. That’s it, and there isn’t any more to it. No evidence, no theories, no probability studies - nothing.

Not to pick on Mr. Anderson here - this letter is from the public and I used it to illustrate a point: That there are far too many people out there that don’t understand TTOE. And what’s more, most of them don’t even fully comprehend ID (though there are several different versions out there, so they can’t be fully blamed for this.) Unfortunately, people see these letters and think that there is a real debate here. That there is something more to ID than a group of people trying to force their beliefs on a mostly unsuspecting public.

And it’s not just ID proponents who are being given this unwarranted time to rant. It’s loonies from the creationism camp, too. The ones who don’t even try to disguise the Bible-based nature of their desire to remove all mentions of evolution: From an article on the website of WTOL about a 13 year old student that is “outraged” at being taught evolution:

It seems to be a question of our times. Should creationism be taught alongside evolution in public schools? Tuesday night, one teen questioned Toledo Public Schools’ curriculum at the board of education meeting in north Toledo.

A question of our times? What? That this is even a question points out how far down we’ve sunk in our critical thinking capabilities. This individual is being given time to espouse his beliefs in front of the school board and they are taking it seriously.

13-year-old Spencer Genson is outraged that evolution can be taught in schools, but not creationism. He thinks both should be addressed. “I believe my rights as a United States citizen are being violated by these teachings,” Genson said to the Toledo School Board. Genson is outraged that evolution is being taught in Toledo Public Schools, without at least the acknowledgement of creationism. “I have a bible and when I read my bible it tells me that I’m a descendant from Adam and Eve, but when I read my curriculum in school it tells me that I come from a monkey.”

Here is someone that want’s creationism taught in science class. Granted this kid is 13, but I cannot believe that this is being taken as seriously as it is. Especially with the statement “…I read my bible it tells me that I’m a descendant from Adam and Eve, but when I read my curriculum in school it tells me that I come from a monkey.” Creationism belongs in an comparative religion class or social studies, not in science class. And perhaps he better listen a little more closely - he may learn the difference between apes (from which we are indirectly descended) and monkeys (which we are not.)

Genson says both evolution and creationism should be taught. And if that’s not possible, then students should be able to opt out of the evolution portion of the science class.

Arrrrrggggg.. So if I don’t like something someone is teaching, I should just be able to leave?

…The TPS board said Spencer makes them proud. President Larry Sykes said “He’s showing how resourceful he is and how articulate and intellectual.” And they are taking his concerns very seriously. “I was very impressed that he was a 13-year-old 7th grader that is very concerned about the way a subject matter is being taught in school,” said Sykes.

What a freaking bunch of crap. Taking his concerns seriously. These people have absolutely no business being on the curriculum board whatsoever. Sure, listen to the guy, but he’s about as credible as the muttering loonies that visit town council meetings and have concerns about the werewolves stalking their pets. Listen and then move on. I love this bit at the end though:

Genson did participate in the evolution portion of his science class over the last few weeks, because his teacher said if he didn’t, he’d get a zero. He wants to keep good grades, so he can go to college at either Oxford or Harvard.

I see his beliefs are so strong he deigned to allow the evils of evolution to be taught to him. And good luck at Oxford and Harvard. God help you if you are trying to become a biologist or something. Genson is also quoted as saying that if the teaching of evolution continues without teaching creationism, he’ll “…pursue the matter in court.” Great. Someone else needs to sue to teach Hinduism in science class too.

These two articles illustrate what is wrong here. For the vast majority of the public at large, these issues are too far out of their reach for cogent discussion. They don’t have the background (though a couple of evenings of light reading before watching American Idol would help) to properly evaluate the ridiculousness of the ID (and creationism) positions. What seems clearly completely insane to me and lots of others, appears sensible and reasonable to many, many others. Including those who sit on school boards, if you can believe that.

The fact that a television station is giving time to covering someone proposing creationism be taught in science class boggles my mind. The only place on TV news this belongs is in the “Offbeat News” segment. You know, where they show funny stories about animals and whacky neighbors doing strange art projects.

The proper response to this ID and creationism stuff is to give it short shrift. Don’t give it any more attention than necessary. It’s only way of generating new converts is through propaganda and the positioning of itself as a viable alternative or adjunct to TTOE. The more non-skeptical press it receives, the more it appears legitimate. It belongs at the bottom of the heap of pseudoscience alongside flat earthers and those who still believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.

T-Mobile has had a rash of security problems over the past month or so. It started with a cracker in California who had access to over 16.3 million customer service records, including those of the Secret Service agents that were assigned to help track him down. It sounds like something from a movie, but it happened.

It didn’t get any better for the carrier when just a few days ago someone jacked the contents of Paris Hilton’s cell phone and posted her address book, notes, and pictures to the net (where they are still circulating…) A high profile case like this doesn’t look very good, especially when you’re using her image in your ads.

And finally, this item from Gizmodo, where some sort of phone phreak has figured out how to access anyone’s voicemail. He demonstrated this by hacking the author’s voicemail in 20 minutes - from a pay phone in a Mexican restaurant. He gives details on how to avoid getting hacked - basically setting a password that is asked for even when calling from your own phone:

Dial your T-Mobile voicemail from your mobile phone. If you don’t know your PIN number, you can set a new one by doing the following: Access your ‘personal options’ by pressing 4. ‘Modify your personal preferences’ by pressing 4, again. Then ‘modify your password’ by pressing 1. Set a new PIN and write it down somewhere secure, if necessary.

After you reset your pin, press the * key to go back to the ‘personal options’ menu (or press 4 from the main menu if you already knew your PIN). Once you have accessed the ‘personal options’ menu you will then press 8 which will enable password authentication when calling from your own mobile phone. Although entering your password every single time you call your voicemail can be a bit of a nuisance, a few seconds of your time is a small price to pay for the security of your voicemail system.

I’ve been a T-Mobile subscriber for two years now. I’ve generally been very happy with their service, but man - if this keeps up I’m going to need to find another provider. This stuff is beginning to look like pattern of lax security on their part. Which is kind of funny, since they actually have my name spelled wrong on my account, and getting it changed has been an exercise in futility - multiple faxes of passports, driver’s licenses, social security cards - all not good enough to make a simple name change. It would probably be easier to just hack their servers. (Just kidding!)

It’s been almost three weeks now since I went on an unsubscribe binge to clear my INBOX of “legitimate” bulk email. That is, messages that I may have signed up for in the past or got subscribed through software registration, etc. This is stuff like Microsoft’s little updates on their office products, Palm’s developer newsletters, etc. You can read about what a pain in the ass it was to actually unsubscribe in some of my previous rants here and here. Three weeks, and now I present the results.

Out of all of the unsubscribes I performed (13, including the ridiculous processes from Microsoft) only two have not sent me email in the past week. These two “winners” include Microsoft (despite the dumb-ass unsubscribe process) and a local business magazine (Digital IQ.)

Every single other unsubscribe has continued to send me email, with no hint that I ever unsubscribed. These aren’t all little crappy companies, either. We’re talking people like Palm - I’m signed up through two separate email addresses with them. Both were unsubscribed, and I just received today two identical emails from them on each of the addresses. Dell - a huge company with the resources to make this work - is still sending me advertising as of yesterday, despite my opt-out attempts.

And there are many more, and they all suck. My company spends *piles* of time making sure that people who are unsubscribed stay unsubscribed and to make sure our web forms all work. These people pay lip-service to being legitimate, but their poor efforts show otherwise.

I just happened to notice this article on The Sandspur, a college newspaper from Florida. It contains so many ridiculous misunderstandings of evolution and intelligent design it makes me wonder how they could even print such stuff. Seriously.

The theory of evolution has been a source of debate since Charles Darwin introduced it. It has created a rivalry that ceaselessly surfaces in the media, the entertainment industry, churches, classrooms, and even everyday conversation. The question is always this: evolution or creation?

Did man evolve from a monkey, who evolved from a reptile, who evolved from a fish, who evolved from a blob of protoplasm, who evolved from one single cell from which all life has subsequently evolved? Or did God create man?

First things first - the theory of evolution generally stays away from the question of the exact origins of life. It specifically deals with the way changes to groups of organisms happen over time to create new, distinct organisms.

I have always wondered-why not both? Why can’t it be that living beings have changed over time but that they have changed under the direction of a superior being?

Well, sure. It could be both. It could also be that we popped into existence last Tuesday or that the Pink Unicorn from Saturn created us from one of her hooves. The problem with all these could have scenarios is that there isn’t really any proof one way or the other. It’s all about faith, which doesn’t give us much to work on, scientifically speaking.

Finally, someone agrees with me because this is the logic behind the latest theory about what we are all doing here. The theory is called the Intelligent Design Theory, and it claims that life is too complex to evolve independently of some controlling force-like God. There is now an official theory on the table that may allow scientists and those who believe in the biblical Creation story to come together and accept a common ground.

This statement is both factually incorrect and wildly optimistic at the same time. First, intelligent design doesn’t work with or cooperate with evolution. As intelligent design is taught, evolution as we know it to occur doesn’t enter into the process at all. That is a prime tenet of ID: evolution is too complex to have occurred naturally - it needs a helping hand.

Second, ID isn’t a theory. There is nothing testable about it. There has not been one study done or even proposed that can help prove or disprove ID. Proponents of ID handwave a lot on this point, but it all boils down to faith. Faith that someone or something created life and helped it along. Again, it’s main tenet is that evolution could not have occurred naturally. That is, ID doesn’t give you anything to work with in establishing a new scientific school of thought - it’s all about tearing down evolution as a theory.

Third, that this “ID Theory” is somehow going to get everyone to the table to start talking is the most dangerous of the assertions. The fact that the author thinks that this “theory” brings everyone together lends extreme credibility to ID that it doesn’t deserve. It is equivalent to saying that the Flat Earth Society has come up with a new version of geometry that reconciles the spherical earth with a 2D version, and it’s will allow scientists to meet and sort out the differences. In other words, it’s a bunch of crap.

As a Christian, I am of course biased on this matter. However, I do not see how someone can accept that life has evolved in the way that it has without guidance. If you put all of the parts of the car into a box unassembled and shake the box for six billion years, will you get a car? Of course not. You will get a box of parts. Nature, from the intricacies of a large ecosystem down to the biological functions of the smallest cell, is perfectly assembled. That sort of perfection does not occur by chance. It’s one of many ways that we can unmistakably see God here among us.

Oh man. Where to start with this load of BS. The author has dragged out the old “box of parts” metaphor that has so long been discredited. I’m not going to even bother. Read this if you’re interested. And perfectly assembled? Hardly.

Now, Rollins College doesn’t seem to be some sort religious school - it looks like a small liberal-arts type place. So I’m surprised that someone like the author is still confused on this topic. It frightens me that someone could be in a place of higher education, and still is getting basic scientific principals mixed up. It’s possible she hasn’t had the education needed for this yet (Freshmen! Sheesh!) but still - what is she doing writing an article like this with absolutely no background on the subject? And apparently without doing any research whatsoever. It doesn’t even qualify as a good opinion piece - it’s just completely inaccurate.

Let me reiterate - stuff like this is dangerous. It lends credibility to an absolutely absurd “theory” where none is yet deserved. People should be free to express their opinions - but please - critical thinking is required here. Too many uninformed people making decisions is how this crap got into schools in the first place. ID is not a replacement for the theory of evolution. ID is not an appropriate “add-on” to the theory of evolution. It has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with pushing God into the classrooms. Muddled and incorrect explanations of this stuff (like the quoted article) don’t help at all.

Link to TalkDesign.org, a good place for information regarding intelligent design.

Bruce Schneier has linked to a very old (1955) HST mini-essay on security. It’s wonderfully concise and perfectly relevant today:

As an afterthought, it seems hardly proper to write of life without once mentioning happiness; so we shall let the reader answer this question for himself: who is the happier man, he who has braved the storm of life and lived or he who has stayed securely on shore and merely existed?

New “technology” from the advertising depths of hell was released in the wild over the past couple of weeks. You know that nice shiny pop-up blocker installed in your browser? Doesn’t work anymore. Some troll selling ad space has come up with some Javascript that bypasses most of these filters resulting in - once again - a painful browsing experience.

Basic pop-up blockers work on the principal that pop-up windows aren’t allowed, unless they are the result of your clicking. That is, unless you initiate an action (by clicking on a link/button) pop-up windows aren’t allowed to be displayed. Well, through some ingenious trickery that will surely land the mystery-author in hell to be ripped apart by HTML tags for all eternity, it appears that they are now adding onclick handlers to some (or all) links so that when you click on something, ads appear. Quite simple in theory - but annoying in practice. What’s more, they are doing this dynamically - a banner ad is navigating the DOM tree and adding these handlers - so that even if the original page doesn’t have these “features”, they get added by an advertiser.

I want to know who these assholes are. Why do they think that we somehow want to view their crappy little ads for casinos, herbal Viagra, and whatever product-of-moment they’re hawking? I purposefully block these ads because they are annoying, as do many people. Why would I suddenly want to purchase their junk? Especially when they are annoying the piss out of me with their chosen advertising method.

These jerks should rot in hell. In my opinion, they are no better than spammers - they screw around finding loopholes to annoy people, in the hopes that enough gullible morons buy their junk to make it worthwhile. The difference is that seemingly reputable companies are being advertised here. For one, NetFlix seems to pop-up (literally!) a lot. I’m never going back to their service because of this. They have control over how they are advertising, and they don’t seem to mind that the services they are using are only one-step above the spam I get in by inbox every day. So bye bye NetFlix.

There are some workarounds for certain browsers. For Firefox/Mozilla, there are plugins that work on whitelisting and regex blocking of suspicious code and known offenders. Unfortunately, this means going back to the bad old days of maintaining these things, but that may be where we’re headed.

Link to MacFixit.com article about this. Good place for links to more information.
Link to Slashdot article.

Kevin Kelly has released a PDF version of his 2003 real-book Cool Tools. Cool Tools is the spiritual kin of The Whole Earth Catalog. They are very similar, except that Cool Tools has more or less kept up with the times. So what he’s done is dumped the entire text - with color pictures - out into a nicely formatted PDF book. It’s yours for $3.50.

Plastruct

This is the scale plastic stock and model parts catalog used by architects, scratchbuild modelers, railroad hobbyists and other miniature makers. They have EVERYTHING at various mini scales: I-beams, T-beams, Hbeams, tubing, tiny plumbing fittings, stone and brick-patterned sheets, plastic sheet stock in every size, color and thickness. The next time you watch a sci-fi film and see a far-away shot of, say a mining colony on a lonely asteroid, you’re probably actually looking at a big chunk of the Plastruct product line. Their website is abominable; get their paper catalog.

–Gareth Branwyn

Plastruct
Catalog, $5
626-912-7016
800-666-7015
www.plastruct.com

The cool thing is it used this new (well, at least to me) service from payloadz.com that seamlessly integrates with paypal.com. Click a link, send some money, and a unique download location is served up for you. Pretty cool stuff for small run things like this.

The whole thing is put up under a Creative Commons license, which allows you to more-or-less give it away for free, but I chipped in the tree-fitty. Well worth it.