Insecurity by obscurity

Today, many people who own a computer don't have a clue about its "inner workings". We're content to let our programs run without worrying about the 1's and 0's running around inside. Unfortunately, when we plugged these systems into the Internet a decade or so ago, we set ourselves up to be attacked by those "in the know". All forms of malware programs began to surface, and some are just as insidious today.

I deem this concept "insecurity by obscurity", a play on the "security by obscurity" mindset often found in IT departments. The obscurity of how a computer works and how programs execute leads us to make poor decisions in how we interact with the Internet. We unknowingly or mistakingly download and execute dangerous programs. We are lulled into believing a password box has our best interests at heart. If we can't see what we're typing, how could anyone else?

Security experts continue to combat these forms of malware, but the total solution involves empowering computer users with the knowledge they need. There has been progress in this area with viruses and spyware becoming household terms (and therefore virus scanners and spyware removers following suit) but my fear is that we will constantly be one step behind in securing the information and assets that exist on our own computers.

Yeah you can cover our song, just don't do a good job

The Romantics are suing Activision Inc., the makers of Guitar Hero, for making a song sound too close to their original recording.

Activision legally purchased the rights to cover the song. Apparently, they just forgot that they weren't supposed to do a good job covering the song. As fans or guitar heroes, we wouldn't want the song to sound like the original, now would we? Never mind that the game that The Romantics may try to take off the shelf will actually increase exposure of their song and probably increase their profits. Never mind what it says about a song if it's so easily reproducible in a cover.

So next time, Activision, when you're covering such a basic song, be sure to miss a few notes or mess up a few words. Instead of saying "That's what I like about you", maybe you could say "That's what you hate about me". Or maybe "That's what I hate about The Romantics".

You have discovered open-source software

It really is amazing how much things have changed in the past two decades. Names such as Microsoft, Apple, Novell, and Netscape were either nonexistent or just beginning to develop. It raises the question: how long will these companies stick around? Some have already seen signs of weakening or acquisition such as Novell and Netscape. Microsoft and Apple have become household names, but some have suggested this may not be the case in the future. Some analysts have even suggested that Google, while in its glory days now, may not always be so prevalent.

One interesting phenomenon of our time is open-source software. It's really quite amazing that virtual communities have flourished and come together to develop software such as Apache and Linux for free. In a way, these are the Picassos and Michaelangelos of our time, contributing to the culture of our society.

I have to say that I am somewhat biased on the subject of open-source software. Over half of my working experience has been in supporting commercial software for a business as well as a university. I have also recently accepted an offer to work for Microsoft. So I obviously feel there is merit to the idea of corporate development of software.

The real questions have to do with what will come next. My roommates and I have enjoyed playing Civilization IV as of late. In that game, you go through the technologies of history and it says things like "You have discovered combustion" or "You have discovered computers". What will be discovered next? We have seen serfdom, slavery, communism, and capitalism. The Economist alluded to the potential of open-source production to replace capitalist methods we see today, and not only in software. Will we ever be at the point where all software will be developed and distributed for free?

Perhaps I'm just not a visionary, but it's hard for me to see. I think a lot of great things have come and will continue to come out of the open-source movement. Many improvements in technology or software come from individual or collective genius, which lends itself well to volunteers in the open-source community. However, other technological breakthroughs require an R&D budget of a corporation. Some in the open-source community get this budget from other corporations in an attempt to subvert Microsoft or other companies. If you were to take away these capitalistic intricacies, then what?

The bottom line, for me at least, is that if it weren't for the compensation of a company, I couldn't see myself creating software. How long can innovation continue without compensation? Who knows - some may argue that because I feel this way, I shouldn't even be involved in the software development process. Maybe they're right. If not though, think of all the technology that we would lose by not rewarding the innovators.

Looks like I'll remain a capitalist for now. I just hope that doesn't hurt me later in the game when another civilization discovers the next form of production...

MP3s

Copyright protection has gone too far in the digital domain. My ideal situation is one where all my digital media is available on my computer. I should be able to instantaneously access any piece of digital media that I "own". I have done what I can to rip all my CDs into music files on my computer. I have organized all my photos from my digital camera and even scanned several dozen hard copy photographs. But digital rights management has gone too far.

The business model for media companies needs to be revamped. We're now at the point where making a copy of a DVD on my computer can be considered illegal, regardless of what I plan to do with it, thanks to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Therefore, putting videos I own on my computer, or making a backup of a DVD in case of future damage, is a legal risk. What we need is not more copy-protection techniques and technologies. What we need is a paradigm shift.

I agree with Orson Scott Card when he says that America will do the right thing if we embrace business practices that will support the artists while relaxing copy protection. Of all my music purchases in the last year, about 80% can be attributed to a preliminary screening where a friend gave me an MP3 file. I'm against circumventing copyright law, but I'm all for word-of-mouth advertising. And in some cases, that means sharing an MP3.

Vampire Electronics

CNN reported on vampire electronics, which are devices that consume electricity even when in an "off" state. The state is really more of a standby state, in which some functionality still draws power such as clocks, timers, etc. With 5% of electricity going to "standby power" it's time to think about what really needs it. How many clocks do we need? DVD players, microwaves, ovens, and cable boxes act as clocks. Some of these devices could be unplugged or better yet have an actual "off" state that does not consume power. Or maybe we should invest in the electric companies and let rising electricity prices put away a nice nest egg for retirement!

Where have all the women gone?

I've often wondered why there seem to be so few women that graduate from the Computer Science program in our university. Of course, there are so few that even start in the program, but even fewer that finish. While I'm sure many men don't finish as well, the numbers are not as obvious.

One temptation is to use some variation of the "girls play with dolls, boys play with trucks" argument. I think this really does have some universal application but I'm hesitant to say how far-reaching. Just because there are stereotypes or general inclinations doesn't mean we should follow them. I've met enough girls who are great with logic, math, computers and have what it takes to "do all things computer science." Working in my last job, I was so happy that there were such great women on our teams who brought amazing perspectives and balance that would have otherwise been severely lacking.

The way I see it, many women may shy away from being in an environment that I often don't enjoy myself. We should spend more time on the concepts and on the logic. Some candidates on which to spend less time? Talking about favorite Linux distros. Bashing/praising Microsoft/Apple/Linux. Casually mentioning that vi is NP-complete.

I think the reason that the major is so unbalanced is that the number of male nerds in one room has reached critical mass, which causes a chain reaction making the room unsuitable for normal human life. In a situation where women are already swimming upstream, we're filling the stream with quirkiness and geekiness and social awkwardness that really isn't necessary. Let's take it back to basics and change the classroom back into a place that fosters normal human interaction and learning.

Online gaming addicting?

There's no doubt that playing games online with other people is more "addicting" than playing by yourself. This doesn't apply just to video games. Any entertaining activity that can be changed to involve other people adds a new level of excitement and keeps people coming back for more. In the case of games, it adds to the replay value - the game becomes as dynamic as people are dynamic. Gone are the days of static, repeatable content. (Those who have actually played MMORPGs may disagree with that last statement!)

No surprise then, that a recent study found MMORPG players spent more time playing in a given week than other control groups with less-enthralling games. The part that worries me is the trade-off described - the players were happier with the gaming experience though less healthy. We need to control the amount of time we dedicate to any one activity, regardless of whether or not we are addicted. Without moderation and balance, we suffer the inevitable consequences of reduced physical, spiritual, and social health.

Security vs. Functionality

Imagine a world found only in science fiction novels or movies. In this world, almost any piece of information is readily available through the ubiquitous computer. What distinguishes our world from this world? Obviously, new developments in information technology, data retrieval methods, and human-computer interaction will make this more of a reality. But what about privacy and security?

In many cases, I believe the technology exists now but we are holding ourselves back. We are cautious to make information more available because we worry about the security and privacy of that data. In our world where acronyms such as PII (Personally Identifiable Information) and SOX (Sarbanes-Oxley Act) have become buzzwords, technology professionals know that just because data can be made available, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Our fear of hackers, phishers, and social engineering keeps us from benefiting from technological advances.

Ultimately, this is a good thing. Networks and the Internet are based on trust. If we can't trust that our information will be protected in an environment, we won't invest the resources to set up that environment. Take, for example, the idea of storing our medical records in a centrally available location. I think everyone would agree that it would be great to have that information readily accessible by any doctor to whom you grant access. However, we'd also agree that our medical records should not be accessible by anyone else. That causes some problems in the design and implementation of a good idea.

This is why I think we've seen less technological innovation in the data realm than we otherwise would have. The fear of hackers, viruses, and insecure data destroys trust - the very trust necessary to establish new environments to store and share data in new ways. The technology is there, and the innovation is abundant, but the trust takes time and resources to foster. We'd have a lot more personal information available if we could trust it would be used properly.

Storing and integrating personal information into the stream of public information available on the Internet is an interesting problem we face today regarding trust. As more people are equipping themselves with personal digital assistants of all types, innovation will lead to PDAs that are truly "assistants" in every sense of the word. They will be able to assist in making decisions because all information necessary will be available to them. Not sure what to have for breakfast? A check of your past meals plus your dietetic analysis could make a suggestion. Worried about where your daughter is? GPS coordinates translated and relayed to you could put your mind at ease. To these examples, our minds scream, "What about security and privacy!?" Those are valid trust issues that we need to solve. Or else, we forfeit amazing, innovative advances in technology.

There is good news. We do move forward. It's rare for a bank today to not have an online presence, thereby making its information available. Social networking sites continue to spread using their viral appeal. Let's hope that this trust continues to grow (without ignoring security) and innovation will not be stifled by fear.

MyFamilySpace

We live in a world where technology enhances what we do. Conversely, if technology doesn't enhance a particular area, it becomes antiquated. Fortunately, technology has significantly enhanced genealogical research.

Social networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook have made it easy to stay in touch with those we care about... if they're alive. The easier it is to stay in touch with a group of people, the harder it is with all others. Thankfully, sites such as FamilySearch have made it easy to "stay in touch" with those who have passed on. Good thing too. Otherwise, we'd see a lot less family history research these days.

So it's easy to stay in touch with our Facebook friends, and our kindred dead... who's left? Time to get grandma an email account... before she becomes antiquated.

Facebook API

This year Facebook opened up their APIs to the world and challenged everyone to build custom applications. In this way, users could add what they felt was missing functionality. This leads to some really cool possibilities in rapid application development (RAD), many of which we see in mashup-creating sites such as Microsoft Popfly.

However, the problem I have with this system is best shown in a graphical format (to the right). It seems every time I login to Facebook, I have to decline requests to add applications.

Facebook has introduced a technological "advancement" and now it's up to us to deal with it, like it or not. I really do like the idea but I hope that Facebook will innovate a better management solution than this.

The who? Oh the Therac-25.

I had never heard of the Therac-25 until this week. What an intriguing story to read and to learn from! It's common knowledge that software has bugs, but what is interesting in this case is the exclusion of software as the culprit in initial investigations. Hardware malfunction was the assumption from the beginning. Only in later examinations was it found that there were serious software defects.

Critical safety software today still may have some bugs in it, although hopefully not of this magnitude. I imagine companies are better about extensively reviewing the software, just as they do the hardware. Still, the responsibility ultimately lies with the programmer to do everything possible to build safety into the software design and the software itself.

That can be tricky for newer programmers who often sacrifice safety for time. Perhaps it stems from the university mindset that when the program compiles and runs, it is complete. If better software design principles were incorporated in university courses, maybe the caliber of software produced in industry would increase.

Now to convince students that every "hello world" program could result in damage to property or loss of life...

The Biggest Entertainment Event of the Year

What event could prompt my roommate to plan a month in advance to request a week off work, and spark a 14-day countdown until that time? A vacation in the tropics? Not quite. A religious holiday? Getting closer. It's the long-awaited Halo 3 release.

I love video games. I remember waiting for some of my favorite games (also the 3rd part of a series) such as Super Mario Bros. 3, Final Fantasy III, and Mega Man 3, and enjoying them in their 8-bit and 16-bit glories. A lot has changed in the past 20 years. The third installment of the Halo series is expected to bring in $150 million the first day. It's more than any film or TV premiere. These games are no longer sitting on the sidelines of the entertainment playing field. They're the main players.

What is most intriguing about Halo 3 and similar games is the replay value, particularly online. The amount of man-hours that will be allocated to Xbox LIVE in the name of Halo will be in the billions.

It's too late to discuss whether or not the investment is worth it. The game is here and billions of hours will be spent. It's up to us to decide how we will react individually. Only recently has mankind had the resources (particularly time) to live a second life in a virtual world. Balance is the key.

So let's evaluate our time budget and make sure we're not neglecting our primary life (the one that doesn't plug in to the wall). Then once we're done, we'll grab some game fuel and join in on the action...

Selfish Technologies?

In the past century, technology has made life much more convenient, and for that I am deeply grateful. I don't know how I would live without the modern conveniences and luxuries to which I have grown so accustomed. They make me much more productive. However, I often find the following equation to be true: increased productivity equals increased free time equals increased time in front of the TV (or insert other indulgences here). The question is how do we use these technologies in a way that keeps us from being selfish and spiritually lacking?

For the answer, I turn to my grandpa. After working for several decades as an ophthalmologist, he could have retired and retreated from the world. However, his interest in technology helped him to remain current in relevant medical knowledge. This allowed him to serve two medical missions for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He spent nearly two years in Ghana, teaching individuals how to perform cataract surgery in a nation plagued by blindness. He later spent a year in South Africa as Area Medical Advisor. To this day he freely serves his neighbors in any way he can.

My grandpa often remarks, "What would my parents think if they saw that I can press a button inside my car and my garage door opens?" Good question. What would my great-grandparents think if they saw how I use technology? Would they be impressed with how much good I accomplish or would they be full of sorrow at the sight of spiritual depravity? Hopefully the former, but I suspect that dichotomy exists within each of us.

Technology is not something to be shunned in the name of spiritual development. Nevertheless, we must embrace it in a way that not only better serves ourselves, but enables us to better serve our fellow men. That will be one of the true tests of mankind in the 21st century.

The Cost of Convenient Data

The digital age has put information at our fingertips in unprecedented amounts and at unprecedented speeds. It's the reason why I can write this blog post while listening to any subset of the songs in my library, without getting up to find a new CD. (tape? record?) I can browse through all of my photos without removing the old Rubbermaid tub from the closet and searching for the album I want.

Neil Postman pointed out that "culture always pays a price for technology." What price do we pay for this convenience? Desensitization. Just over 20 years ago, the space shuttle Challenger disintegrated and time stopped. In 2003, Columbia disintegrated on re-entry and it made its way in and out of everyone's RSS feeds for a couple weeks. Even on September 11, 2001 - arguably the day with the largest historical impact thus far in my life - my day was relatively routine.

Cost/benefit analysis? As long as a few keystrokes allow me to listen to Debussy rather than finding the 8-track (and the 8-track player?), the benefits outweigh the costs. However, society needs a way to "re-sensitize." My guess is that this will happen on an individual level, rather than societal. For me, I take a step back from the constant stream of information and realize the magnitude of the events transpiring around me. Then I plug myself back in.