Categories
Geek

Get thee to The Farm!

Ah, at last a geeky post. I am, after all, supposed to be some kind of computer-y programmer-y sort of guy. WIth a degree ‘n’ stuff, even!

This is one of my semi-regular annoucements that yes, there is a technical blog I write as part of my TC/DC (Technical Community Development Coordinator) responsibilities for Tucows. It’s called the The Farm: The Tucows Developers’ Hangout and it covers all kinds of things that the computer-y programmer-y sort of person would find useful (as well as being a one-stop source of OpenSRS material). Today’s entry has all kinds of goodies, including:

Go visit The Farm!

Categories
Geek It Happened to Me

I have no bytes and I must scream

The help authoring program I’m using has destroyed many hours’ worth of work and I have to board a plane in five hours. I’m ready to hurl my computer against the wall, but I think I’ll just go to bed instead.

Categories
Geek

Accordion City is SCO’s first stop on their tour

Ryan Skadberg just pointed me to the page for SCO’s “City to City” tour, and the first stop is Accordion City. Surely we can get some kind of prank organized.

If someone can get me a penguin suit and is willing to cover any possible legal fees, I will don the suit, sneak into the conference and “sport hump” (a great tradition from Crazy Go Nuts University) SCO’s CEO and Chief Asshole Darl McBride. Really.

Photo: SCO CEO and Chief Asshole Darl McBride.

Look at that face. You know you want to see me in a penguin suit sport humping this man. Help me to help you.

Recommended Reading

In case you don’t know wat this whole hate-on for SCO is, some articles:

Categories
Geek

Save democracy from a broken standards committee!

Cory Doctorow, being the Outreach Coordinator for the EFF — the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the good guys who campaign for civil liberties online — asked to make a mention of this important issue. The issue may seem merely technical, but it affects us all, and I’ve put it in layperson’s terms.

What is the IEEE?

IEEE is short for Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, a non-profit professional organization of engineers who work with electricity, electronics and computers. Their mission, as put forth on their web site, is “The IEEE promotes the engineering process of creating, developing, integrating, sharing, and applying knowledge about electro and information technologies and sciences for the benefit of humanity and the profession”. They do a lot of technical publishing, host conferences and quite often help to define standards (one example, the “FireWire” standard for high-speed computer interfaces, also know as IEEE 1394).

What are they doing with voting machines?

One standard that they’re currently working on is for electronic voting machines. Work on this standard arose from the voting debacle during the 2000 U.S. Presidential elections in Florida. Most of the work on this standard is nearly done, and the draft for it is currently out to ballot by voting members of the IEEE. Once finished and passed by the IEEE, the standard will be forwarded to ANSI — the American National Standards Institute — for final validation.

The IEEE sits on an advisory committee to the forthcoming Election Assistance Commission established by the Help America Vote Act. This means that this standard could ultimately be adopted broadly throughout the United States. The EFF summarizes: “In a very real sense, the future of democratic systems in the U.S. and around the world are implicated by this standard — the stakes couldn’t be higher.”

Okay, so far, so good. Where’s the problem?

The IEEE working group for the voting machines created a design standard instead of a requirements standard.

(Those of you who are software engineering types are probably nodding your heads and saying “ah, I see.” I’ll explain for everyone else now.)

A requirements standard, simply put, is a document that describes what the end result should be. For instance, the requirements for a voting machine might be:

  • It must store a log of each vote, and attach a timestamp so we can tell when the vote was made
  • There must be some kind of mechanism or way for an independent verication process to determine whether or not the votes have been tampered with
  • The storage system used to store the votes must be 99.9999% reliable (that is, it should fail only 0.0001% of the time)

A design standard, on the other hand, describes how the end result shall be acheived. the deesign for a voting machine might be:

  • It should have a touch screen
  • It should be built with standard PC components
  • Votes should be stored on a hard drive, with another hard drive “mirroring” the main hard drive in case it fails.

As you can probably tell, a requirements standard, while being more general, tends to be valid for a much longer period of time. Technologies change often, but most of the time, the needs addressed by those technologies don’t.

Simply put, they didn’t write a standard to address the problems with voting machines, they wrote one that simply says how they should be built.

Cory reports that in concentrating on the “how” and not the “what”, the standard fails to require or even recommend that voting machines be truly voter verified or verifiable. How this could’ve been missed by actual certified electrical engineers, but caught by me — a guy who failed out of electrical engineering at Crazy Go Nuts University (ranked 430 out of the 431 student in the class of ’91) — boggles the mind.

Not only did the IEEE write a design rather than a requirements standard, according to the EFF, they also followed the basic plans of current voting machines. They also say that they’ve heard disturbing things:

  • claims “that the working group and committee leadership is largely controlled by representatives of the electronic voting machine vendor companies and others with vested interests.”
  • reports of “serious procedural problems with the…Committee processes, including shifting roadblocks placed in front of those who wish to participate and vote, and failure to follow basic procedural requirements.”

The EFF is concerned about this and is asking people to get involved. Go take a peek at the page devoted to this issue on their site to find out more. They’ve even provided a form that makes it very simple for you to voice your concerns about the voting machine standard.

Categories
Geek

Trash that "Current Security Pack" email from "Microsoft"

If you got email from the “MS Corporation Network Security Center”, throw it away!

The email purports to be from Microsoft, has a Microsoft-like logo and nice-looking Windows XP-like logos. The hyperlinks all seem to connect to the right places — the TRUSTe link, for instance, does link to a real TRUSTe page certifying that Microsoft Corporation is a TRUSTe licensee. It has an attached executable that the email claims to be the “September 2003, Cumulative Patch” update which “fixes all known security vulnerabilities affecting MS Internet Explorer, MS Outlook and MS Outlook Express”.

It’s a virus. Microsoft is not in the habit of sending updates via email, they prefer to direct you to use “Windows Update” on your Start menu. Besides, their updates are never small enough to send via email anyway. The “from” address header is fake and comes from “msn.com” — MSN has nothing to do with patches.

Since my Apple Powerbook is my email machine and since Tucows’ mail server’s anti-virus software nabbed it anyway, I am unaffected. I thought I’d just pass a warning to all of you out there.

Categories
Geek It Happened to Me

I wonder if the same engineer was involved

Back in early 2002, I went down to the San Francisco Bay Area to hang out with friends and to help my housemate Paul present Peekabooty at CodeCon. I arrived a day early and hung out with my friend Jillzilla in Mountain View that night, where we met some engineers who were wondering why my accordion didn’t make any sound. I made a note of our conversation in my blog entry for February 23, 2002:

A group of drunk partygoers — an even mix of men and women — see the accordion and ask the question that most ninety-nine out of one hundred people ask: “Do you know how to play that thing?” I prove that I can by breaking into a couple of popular tunes.

After a couple of tunes, I stop to talk to the group. One of the women is pressing on the keys repeatedly and getting frustrated.

Her: It’s not making any sound!

Me: Of course not.

Her (annoyed, as if I’m playing some kind of joke on her): Why not?

Me: Because I’m not squeezing the bellows right now.

Her: What?

Me: The accordion is just a big harmonica with buttons and an air bag. Sound doesn’t come our of a harmonica by itself; you have to blow air into it to make noise. Same here, except you squeeze the bellows to move air over the reeds.

Her (impressed by my extremely basic science): Wow.

One of the guys: Dude, you’re not from around here, are you? What brings you down here?

Me: I’m visiting my friend Jill [I point to Jill] and am attending a conference in San Francisco tomorrow.

Guy: We’re all from around here. Most of us work at Lockheed.

Her: I’m a mechanical engineer there.

Me (thinking): I am never ever boarding a Lockheed plane again.

I was reminded of this story because earlier this week, I’d heard about how a satellite at the Lockheed Martin plant where those engineers worked got ruined due to sheer incompetence:

As the NOAA-N Prime spacecraft was being repositioned from vertical to horizontal on the “turn over cart” at approximately 7:15 PDT today, it slipped off the fixture, causing severe damage. (See attached photo). The 18′ long spacecraft was about 3′ off the ground when it fell.

The mishap was caused because 24 bolts were missing from a fixture in the “turn over cart”. Two errors occurred. First, technicians from another satellite program that uses the same type of “turn over cart” removed the 24 bolts from the NOAA cart on September 4 without proper documentation. Second, the NOAA team working today failed to follow the procedure to verify the configuration of the NOAA “turn over cart” since they had used it a few days earlier.

(The emphasis is mine, by the way.)

In case you’re dying for a visual, here’s a large photo of the satellite after it tipped over.

I can see the instant message chatter going on at Lockheed right now:

[RocketMan23] SRRY BOUT BORRWING BOLTS WITHOUT TELLING U BUT U SHULD HV CHEKD LOL

I really do wonder if the same engineer was involved…

Categories
Geek

Books on my desk

raku from the #joiito IRC channel on freenode.net saw the posting with the Tucows office photos and asked if he could see a close-up of the books on my desk. Here you go:

Photo: Books on Joey deVilla's desk at Tucows.

The books are:

  • Upper Shelf
    • Professional PHP Programming
    • XML By Example
    • UNIX Power Tools
    • Refactoring
    • Internet Core Protocols
    • Negotiating For Dummies
    • Making It Happen
    • Open Sources: Voices From the Open Source Revolution
    • Embracing Insanity: Open Source Software Development
    • Programming Ruby (PDF, printed out and in a 3-ring binder)
    • Dive Into Python (also a printed-out PDF)
    • A whole mess of Tucows APIs in binders
    • Tucows Employee handbook (also in a 3-ring binder)
  • Lower shelf
    • Linux Programming By Example
    • Linux in a Nutshell
    • Practical Linux
    • The Unified Modelling Language Reference Manual
    • Instant UML
    • UML Distilled
    • Learning Perl
    • Programming Perl
    • Mastering Perl 5
    • Python Web Programming

I’d provide an appropriate link for each book, but I just don’t have the time.