Truth in spamming

“Fraudulent spam” cries the title of a recent unsolicited email message, pushing the limits of CAN-SPAM act. At least the FTC could not accuse this sender of false representation. The finally-out-of-beta Gmail had no problems delegating it to the junk mail folder correctly, but this one deserves points for creativity. With the exception of the unique title, there is nothing unusual about the rest of the message: same generic announcement about a mortgage preapproval, fantastically low rates, not contingent on credit history etc. (Quote: “[…] your credit is in no way a factor”– apparently these folks have not heard about the crisis in subprime lending sector.)

This is not the first time that subject has appeared in spam either. You have to wonder if it is a bug in the software, stamped on by an over-zealous intermediate gateway (in which case why is it not dropping the message completely?) or intentional attempt to exploit the relative simplicity of filters, a demonstration of how unintelligent AI can get. A person looking at a message with subject line “Fraudulent spam” is not going to get fooled. But for all their sophistication at detecting variations and creative spellings of m0r1gag3, the average antispam solution could easily get tricked by a novel approach.

cemp

Vista upgrade– UAC quirks and Dell (un)reliability

UAC created a unique problem for the laptop, intended to dual-boot XP and Vista. More precisely, it was dual booting until a recent “update” from Windows Update rendered the XP side inoperable with a blue screen complaining that registry could not be loaded. But that can not be blamed on Vista. (Yes in principle, one could load the crash dump in a debugger to investigate in copious spare time.) Attempting to rescue files creates an interesting problem, because accessing the XP file system requires exercising the “take ownership” privilege granted to administrator accounts in Vista. UAC gates the exercise of administrator rights, in keeping with least-privilege principle. Under XP take-ownership is applied automatically and would work seamlessly from Explorer. Browse to the documents folder of the other OS and you are authorized every step of the way, because access check logic helps itself to the ownership shortcut.

Under Vista, that doesn’t work. It leads to not one but 2 UAC prompts, after which you end up with an error message to the effect that getting access will require using the Security Tab. (Right click, Properties / Security.) It is here that the ownership can be changed to one of the accounts on the Vista side, and this has to be done recursively by checking “Replace owner on sub-containers and objects.” After a few more UAC prompts, the directory is open to browsing.

But the trouble does not end there– trying to open a Word document results in an access-denied message inside word. Ownership had been changed, but the permissions on the file were not updated and still referred to the non-existent accounts from XP installation. On the other hand, copying the files to a different location, for example to burn them on a CD, required a single prompt in Explorer, suggesting that it is up to each application to detect and work-around these error cases

cemp

Vista upgrade battle stories

So far, so good. After installing Ultimate edition on an older vintage laptop and new desktop PC, the situation is stable. No pressing need to roll-back, no application compatibility issues, no horror stories of data loss, missing drives or precious iTunes collections going up in smoke.

But installation experiences followed decidedly different trajectories, with the desktop working out much better. An AMD x2 system from Dell, it was already labelled “Vista ready” (although the definition of that phrase is in dispute currently) and shipped with a dual-monitor capable graphics card, enabling Vista Ultimate to shine with the nifty Aero Glass visuals. Strange that Dell website made no mention of the dual-monitor capability, unlike other models where customers are given the option to purchase a second monitor.

The laptop, a Dell Inspiron 700m about 18 months old, did not fare as well, perhaps because it was not designed to run Vista. As far as quality problems, that would be the least of its problems. After about 1 year– no doubt coincidentally, the warranty period– the battery no longer holds a charge more than one hour, rendering the machine an expensive brick, unless it is tethered to the wall and drawing juice. But then again given the inclination of Dell batteries towards spontaneous combustion, one must be grateful for a merely useless battery. No more Dell laptops for this blogger.

After the upgrade, the 700m runs noticeably slower but remained perfectly usable. The perceived responsiveness of the system approximates the way blogger’s favorite Compaq TC1000 tablet PC with TransMeta used to run plain XP Professional circa 2003. Vista had no problems recognizing the NIC, wireless card, Firewire controller and smart-card reader. Biggest challenge has been the integrated touch-pad which is currently recognized as a standard mouse device. One of the key pieces of software from Dell website is a custom driver for the touch-pad and associated software that allows fine-tuning the sensitivity of the tracking surface. Without that it is extremely sensitive and the slightest glancing finger movement registers as a click. When typing away at a hurried pace, clicking at random will result in moving the cursor to a different place and scrambling existing text– or worse hitting a button such as “send” on unfinished email. Very frustrating. No Vista drivers from Dell yet.

cemp

Supreme court speaks but will the EPA listen?

In what is being heralded as a milestone decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency does have the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. If that sounds like re-iterating the obvious, consider that the decision was handed down with the slightest margin of 5-4, the votes aligned on party lines for the most part with Justices Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas dissenting. (Justice Kennedy cast the deciding vote.) EPA itself has been resisting the call from advocacy groups to regulate emissions for the past 6 years, claiming that policies to curb US emissions will do nothing to curb global warming resulting from emissions in developing countries. Quoting the decision the New York Times wrote in a first page article on Tuesday:

by providing nothing more than a “laundry list of reasons not to regulate,” the environmental agency had defied the Clean Air Act’s “clear statutory command.”

Strictly speaking the decisions does not require EPA to intervene but leaves an unusual way out for the agency: by declaring that greenhouse gases are not harmful and do not constitute a danger to the environment. It remains to be seen whether bogus science will be called on once again to support the expedient option.

cemp

EMI announces DRM-free music

It is finally happening, but the Beatles selection may not be part of the deal.(Ironic considering their long standing brand disputes over “Apple,” since the Fab Four’s recording company was called Apple Records long before Jobs and Wozniak put together their first prototype.)

iTunes will be the first to carry music sans DRM. This may become the rare controlled experiment in free market economics. Both proponents and detractors of DRM have argued that it is (not) the optimal way for content owners to maximize revenue. Until now there was no way to empirically verify this because there was no way to get DRM-free music online, with the exception of the beleaguered Russian site AllOfMP3 which always seemed to be on the verge of legal trouble. With the option to choose between unrestricted and DRMed downloads, consumers can now vote with their wallet to express a preference.

cemp

Starship troopers: from the page to the screen

It did not win the Academy award for special effects after a 1998 nomination, but the director and screen-writers truly deserve a special award for creating a C- movie out of an A+ science fiction classic. These are the first impression prompted after watching the movie, within a few short weeks of completing the book.

The first fatal error they made is trying to improve on Robert A. Heinlein’s original story. Granted the book about a future militarist/libertarian society at war with an alien civilization itself is extremely controversial and perhaps not the easiest to transfer to the big screen. It is strange that a work held-up as breaking the mold in science fiction, by eschewing “escapist adolescent fantasies” in favor of a very rough and gritty world view, becomes a movie with more flash than substance, shedding the hard philosophy and leaving behind the carefully doctored ultra-violent battles scenes as the  only redeeming virtue.

Some of the plot departures may have been unavoidable. In the book, the identity of Rico’s staff sergeant is hidden from the reader until the end, even as he plays a pivotal role in the final battle against the bugs. Of course it turns out to be familiar character, but in the movie this would have been difficult to hide when the director is obliged to at least include voice-snippets if not actual images of the character. But other substitutions make no sense: Rico’s unit, the “Roughnecks,” is commanded by his civics teacher who is long retired from the military. Rico has not one, but two competing romantic interests. And the most jarring contradiction, far from being an average “grunt” with no special talents– intended to prove that an ordinary solider can accomplish remarkable things, quite inline with Heinlein’s libertarian worldview– Rico starts out as an accomplished athlete,  a dashing, dapper gentleman with a girlfriend also serving for the Federation army.

Hollywood has not been kind to Heinlein. Philip K. Dick inspired a series of more or less successful movie adaptations. Some strayed very far from the original, and not always by choice: after all Minority Report, Paycheck and We can remember it for your wholesale (which inspired Total Recall) were short stories, not exceeding a few dozen pages. Developing that into a blockbuster necessarily calls for some imaginative extrapolation. By contrast Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner was remarkably true to the dark-vision of Do androids dream of electric sheep? and Richard Linklater captured the harrowing drug-induced madness of A Scanner Darkly. Sci-fi fans can only hope that Heinlein also deserves a second chance.

cemp

NFL clip incident, act II

My friend and law professor Wendy Seltzer’s story was Slashdotted last week, after the NFL apparently violated procedure around DMCA takedown notices.

According to her blog post, the clip from Superbowl broadcast showing the copyright warning was restored by YouTube after her counter-notification. Not content to let the matter rest, NFL fired back. But instead of seeking action in court as called for by DMCA, they sent a second, identical notice to YouTube resulting in removal of the offending content for a second time. Quote:

If the NFL deigned to respond, I expect they would argue something like “the volume of material is so high, we can’t possibly keep track of all the claims of non-infringement. Our bots are entitled to a few mistakes.” But if they’re not able to keep track of the few counter-notifications they’ve received (the YouTube URL and page stayed the same at all times it’s been up), how can they demand that YouTube respond accurately and expeditiously to all the DMCA notifications they send, or worse, filter all content as Viacom is demanding?

This is an interesting complement to stories of users wronged by content owners and threatened with costly lawsuits. Perhaps for the first time, the target of the infringement claim is an expert in DMCA, runs the website ChillingEffects dedicated to chronicling DMCA abuses (at one point used by Google when search results were altered due to take-down notice) and is writing about her experiences in a blog.

cemp

Walt Mossberg on DMCA

Very good sign that the tide is turning when a highly influential technology columnist writing in a mainstream publication criticizes the DMCA:

In fact, the DMCA, and other recent laws and regulations passed under pressure from media companies, are pretty hostile when it comes to consumers. They turn essentially innocent actions into unlawful behavior, because they define copyright infringement too broadly. They have given rise to a technology called Digital Rights Management that causes too many hassles for honest people and discriminates against the new digital forms of distribution.

Walt Mossberg writing in the Wall Street Journal.

cemp

Trying times for socially responsible investing

SRI mutual funds have always been insistent on saying that following your conscience does not mean compromising on returns. Full page advertisements in magazines such as Utne Reader are designed to drive home the point that screening investments based on criteria of “social impact” does not produce subpar results compared to purely economic selection strategies. (But then again proponents of the efficient-markets hypothesis would say that is because equity valuations are essentially unpredictable. Monkeys throwing darts at the board to pick stocks would do equally well according to this theory, in which case one might as well vote their values.)

An article in CNN/Money is now taking them to task for this claim:

The typical “do good” portfolio has lagged the market of late, causing investors to yank out nearly $1 billion last year, or about 3 percent of the assets in ethical funds.

2 problems are cited. The obvious one is missing out on the recent surge in energy and oil sector, industries which are traditionally very damaging to the environment. Granted not all SRIs screen for environmental friendliness. The extensive index of SRI funds at the Social Investment Forum shows that only 4 funds declared a policy of no-investment in eco-offenders, the majority have “positive screens” intended to encourage directing funds towards eco-friendly technologies and a handful have no screening criteria at all in this category. But considering that precious metals and energy will likely remain strong in spite of retreat in oil prices, the bottom line is not going to improve.

Second reason is more subtle: all that screening for corporate practices is costly and contributes to higher than average expenses. Even passive index funds boast ratios three times that of the industry standard.

What the article hints at is that screening criteria made no sense in the first place. Starbucks, not always successful but by any definition strives for social responsibility, in its employment benefits, trade relations with coffee growers and resource-efficient operations– those coffee-cup sleeves are made of recycled cardboard. But that didn’t stop Pax World Balanced fund from divesting SBUX because they lent their brand to the Starbucks liqueur; alcohol being a deal-breaker for this particular SRI fund. Others take issue with nuclear energy, even though coal-fired power plants and gas guzzler vehicles are much bigger immediate problem than proper disposal of nuclear waste.

cemp

Energy exhibit at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry

Wondering through the exhibit on Sunday, one begins to wonder if it was designed by the nuclear energy industry itself.

Part of the excellent  museum collection, home to the captured German U-505 submarine and currently hosting the  immensely popular Body Worlds 2 exhibit, the Energy room is meant to explain the concept of energy in its different manifestations and how industrial processes convert between them. Kids are obsessed with the interactive display for electricity generation: spin a wheel as hard as you can, and watch bulbs being to light up as the hand-cranked generator converts work into current.

That’s the fun part. Second half of the room is exclusively devoted to indoctrination on power generation. An entire quarter of the floor is around uranium mining, production and disposal of highly radioactive nuclear waste. Geologists will check that the sealed burial mounds can contain waste and keep-out rainwater at Yucca Mountain, we are told. Otherwise the site will not be used, according to one display that contains sample of actual rock from the area. (“Trust us, we are experts and show due diligence before deciding where to dump the stuff.”)
Even more puzzling are the charts on the wall showing the break-down of power generation by source. They contradict each other: one claims nuclear energy supplying 20%+ of curren wht US capacity, the other has the more reasonable 13% figure. More amusing are the projections for the future. The graph with the more accurate data shows the catch-all category of “other” sources of energy– including renewable sources, which are key to reducing carbon emissions– make up 8% of existing demand “today” (Or at least when the exhibit was installed in 1998.) Projected share in 2010? Exactly zero percent.

Darth Vader would find their lack of faith disturbing. Other sources decline as well: in the bright future, coal loses momentum which is a good thing considering that other displays point to its highly polluting nature. So does nuclear energy. Instead the slack is taken up by natural gas which grows to provide over a quarter of capacity.

All in all, this exhibit may have been a great return on investment for companies investing in nuclear energy and natural-gas. At least in 1998.

cemp