Finally, a decent explanation of .NET

Charles Wiltgen has written the first hype free explanation of .NET that I’ve ever seen, and it’s surprisingly positive, explaining things that I was still hazy on. (Haziness generally caused by the MS marketing machine.)

The article is aimed for the Mac OS tech-savvy, with lines like, “C# is to .NET as Objective-C is to Cocoa.” I think it’ll be clear in the non-technical points, but if there are any analogies you want to clear up, feel free to email me.

Longish essay coming up shortly on the new Microsoft security strategy. I wrote this yesterday, but it was eaten by an Internet glitch and I haven’t had the heart to rewrite it yet.

Update, April 12, 2002: Joel Spolsky, a programmer who generally really knows what he’s talking about, says that .NET is just about the greatest thing since sliced bread.

SatireWire: Microsoft to split into software and bug-fix companies

SURPRISE SETTLEMENT EVENLY SPLITS MICROSOFT

> Under the agreement, Microsoft will no longer issue patches, which Gates said explains the recent five-day outage at Microsoft’s upgrade site. “That was planned,” he said. “It was a test of the Microsoft No Patch Access system. Went perfectly. No one was able to download anything.”

>One Reuters reporter, meanwhile, questioned the long-term viability of Patchsoft. “This seems like a logical split right now, but what if Microsoft’s products improve to the extent that patches are needed less frequently, or perhaps not at all?” she asked.

>”I’m sorry, I can only respond to serious questions,” Blumenthal answered.

I need your help on this site’s speed.

I’ve been troubleshooting a problem over the weekend with the speed of this site. I’m getting conflicting information as to whether the problem is with my site provider (i.e., everyone sees it), or with my home ISP (i.e., it’s just me).

So I’d appreciate it if you’d click that Reply button and let me know whether this site seems fast/medium/slow compared to the other sites you visit, and what kind of connection you use. (Something like, “Your site came up normally and I’m using an AOL dial
-up”, or “Your site came up slowly and I’m on Verizon DSL.”)

Thanks in advance to anyone who replies.

Jeff [at] jeffporten.com is “unforgettable”.

I don’t mean to make this become “all spam reports, all the time”, but I found this in my almost-never-checked dialup email box today and thought it was wonderful.

    Chances are you’ll switch ISPs in the next year. Or possibly change jobs.

    This means yet another e-mail address and the inconvenience of notifying all your personal and business contacts. And free e-mail account providers, including Yahoo and Hotmail, brand themselves, not you or your business! Your e-mail address should be a reflection of you.

    Avoid the hassle, and always stand out with your own personalized e-mail address: Jeff [at] JeffPorten.com Now that’s unforgettable!

    Click here to get Jeff [at] JeffPorten.com now.

Nice to know someone else thinks so.

DotBizToday is run by scumbags

More spam over the transom today, this time flogging the new .biz domain space and yet another company offering to register it for me, as if I couldn’t do it myself for nine bucks.

So I do whatever I do when I get spam, which is to open up the Internet email headers, track down their Internet service providers, and let them know which of their users is violating Terms of Service and must be instantly eradicated. Copies go off to the FTC for good measure, who occasionally bring out the big guns.

So I’m doing that for these new guys, tracking down their domain, when I come across this tidbit in the WHOIS database:


    dotbiztoday.com
    Request: dotbiztoday.com
    Internet Domain Registrars WHOIS Server v.1.5

    Registrant:
    Dot Biz Today
    629 - 465 NE 181st Avenue
    Portland, Or 97230
    US
    (PH) 670-3611

    Registration Date: 11-Sep-2001 14:03:28
    Expiration Date: 11-Sep-2002 11:03:27

These guys are on the West Coast, as is their registrar (I checked), so at somewhere between 2:03 PM and 5:03 PM Eastern Time on September 11th, these guys were busily working on setting their new spamming business.

Now maybe you’re thinking, “hey, maybe they just hadn’t heard yet,” to which I remind you, these people were on the Internet.

You’ve got to be a pretty feculent life form to send spam, but these guys took it to a whole new level.

Apple’s mail system goes a bit nuts

Just received the following e-mail message from Apple, three times:


    From: System Attendant

    To: “Washington, D.C. Upcoming Events”

    Subject: ScanMail Message: To Recipient virus found and action taken.

    Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:27:30 -0500

    ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has detected virus-infected attachment(s).

    Sender = Apple Events
    Recipient(s) =Virginia-out@seminar.apple.com; Maryland-out@seminar.apple.com; WashingtonDC-out@seminar.apple.com; WestVirginia-out@seminar.apple.com; Delaware-out@seminar.apple.com; Pennsylvania-out@seminar.apple.com; Maine-out@seminar.apple.com; Massachusetts-out@seminar.apple.com; NewHampshire-out@seminar.apple.com; RhodeIsland-out@seminar.apple.com; Vermont-out@seminar.apple.com; NorthernCalifornia-out@list.seminars.apple.com; Nevada-out@seminar.apple.com; Idaho-out@seminar.apple.com; Wyoming-out@seminar.apple.com; Montana-out@seminar.apple.com; Oregon-out@seminar.apple.com; Washington-out@seminar.apple.com; Alaska-out@seminar.apple.com; Utah-out@seminar.apple.com; NewYork-out@seminar.apple.com; NewYorkCity-out@seminar.apple.com; NewJersey-out@seminar.apple.com; Connecticut-out@seminar.apple.com; Texas-out@seminar.apple.com; Oklah@apple.com

    Subject = Trade Show: Seybold New York-Apple Events
    Scanning Time = 01/18/2002 10:27:29

    Action on virus found:
    The attachment ATT45294.ATT matched file blocking settings. ScanMail has Moved it. The attachment was moved to
    C:\PROGRA~1\Trend\Smex\Alert\ATT452943c484cf02d.ATT_.

    Warning to recipient. ScanMail detected a virus in an email attachment.

    —————————————————————————

    Apple values its relationship with you.

    This message is being sent to you as a result of your request to the Apple Seminars & Event email notification system.

    This subscription was generated either by selecting “YES” for notice of upcoming events on your Event registration form or by direct request from the listserve.

    If you wish to unsubscribe from this service visit: http://asp-web.info.apple.com/html/listserve.html

    We’re sorry that we are unable to reply to e-mail messages.


I had gotten a legitimate message from them earlier in the day that did NOT have the ATT45294.ATT file attached, so I have no idea why the Chicago Daily Herald decided that these were the places to send this announcement to. The weird bit, though, is that these are announcement-only lists, so a) I shouldn’t be getting these messages, and b) I definitely shouldn’t be able to see what appears to be the “secret email addresses” that Apple apparently uses to send out announcements, all of which are plastered in the email. (And which I’ve modified in this posting, just in case Apple doesn’t get this fixed before a zillion spammers get their hands on them.)

In any case, a Windows virus scanner finding a virus in an email from Apple—possibly by mistake, as my copies don’t have that file—and then blasting recipient-only messages to entire mailing list that should be closed off, well, that was rich even before Apple signed off by telling me how much they value our relationship.

Ten bucks says that they’re not using LetterRip, the premier mailing list tool for the Mac, to manage these lists, ’cause with that software it’s just easy to set up your security.

Double-take at the Washington Post web site

Now that text advertisements are the Next Big Thing on the web, I was brought up short wondering if I was seeing a brilliant new campaign when I ran across the following on the Washington Post site this morning; note the bit highlighted in yellow.

In case that’s too small to read, that says, “Error in Ad Code Arguments. Found Comment Tags. Illegal Format.”

Just someone’s poor programming sticking out of their waistband.

War on terror leading to war on people

Human Rights Watch has released their World Report 2002, a state of the world report on human rights.

None too surprisingly, the report finds that “the anti-terror campaign led by the United States is inspiring opportunistic attacks on civil liberties around the world.”

“Terrorists believe that anything goes in the name of their cause,” said Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. “The fight against terror must not buy into that logic. Human rights principles must not be compromised in the name of any cause.”

The entire report is 670 pages, so for a smaller investment of your time, watch this 3 1/2 minute video from the BBC.

Irrelevant note: the sharp-eyed will note that BBC broadcasts are in high-definition, using a widescreen aspect ratio.

Illuminati in training

The Red Herring chimes in with a fascinating article about the Carlyle Group, an international investment fund with major interests in the defense industry and powerful contacts in global governments, through a heavy-hitter list that includes George H.W. Bush, John Major, and until recently the estranged family of Osama bin Laden.

[I]t is hard to ignore the fact that Osama bin Laden’s family members, who renounced their son ten years ago, stood to gain financially from the war being waged against him until late October, when public criticism of the relationship forced them to liquidate their holdings in the firm. Or consider that U.S. president George W. Bush is in a position to make budgetary decisions that could pad his father’s bank account.

Anchordesk is taking the Pepsi Challenge

David Coursey, head honcho at AnchorDesk, is switching to the Mac for a month to report on what a Wintel user would see if they follow the path that Apple is pushing for.

What makes this interesting is that AnchorDesk is frequently seen as being anti-Mac, publishing articles that contain minor mistakes about the platform, and generally falling for the Windows media hype hook, line, and sinker. But that’s the opinion of Mac fanatics, and we’re generally discounted by the outside world.

It seems that Coursey is going to be using a G3 processor Mac that’s just lying around, which tilts the game in Wintel’s favor slightly. All new Mac desktops run at least a G4 processor, the next generation up; only the iBooks still ship with G3s. Mac OS X likes a lot of RAM and eats a lot of processor power, and most of the complaints about OS X on the Mac lists come from people running older hardware.

Still, an interesting development.

Microsoft updates update

The Register continues coverage on the Microsoft updates issue, with some analysis on what’s going on and some posted workarounds for people who want to patch their security holes sooner rather than later.

Microsoft’s problems with the Windows Update site are more complex and widespread than first appeared. Users have been having sporadic problems accessing Windows Update for some days now, but “internal DNS server problems” have meant that Microsoft staff haven’t been able to get to numerous sites from the company’s internal network.

Addendum, 10:18 AM: The Register also covers an interesting lawsuit by Microsoft against Lindows.com, developers of software to run Windows software under Linux. There’s also a story on a very simple workaround that entirely defeats Microsoft Internet Explorer privacy settings. And Wired reports on yet another IE security hole, which can’t be fixed thanks to the issues with the updater site.

Cool toy on the horizon

This looks like a contender for the next big thing.

The device will surf the Web, send and receive e-mail and, with an extra attachment, shoot digital photos, which can then be sent by e-mail. It’s also a mobile phone. Danger will make versions of the devices that work on both types of wireless networks that predominate in the U.S.

More information in the full article on Forbes.com.

When will we finally hold Microsoft accountable?

Two new stories on the radar this morning, one from the LA Times, one from The Register, both about Microsoft’s atrocious security standards.

In the LA Times article, Joseph Menn reports that some members of Congress and others are finally starting to pay attention to what Microsoft has been up to. Meanwhile, The Register reports that Microsoft’s own infrastructure for fixing security holes has been broken since Thursday.

What security issues, you ask? Long story short, many of the worst breaches in information security over the past few years haven’t been due to brilliant hackers breaking down brick walls, they’ve been due to random hackers wandering through holes left in the walls. And most of the holes that caused the viruses you’ve heard the most about—Code Red, NIMDA, Melissa (and a few dozen variants)—were put there by Microsoft.

That in and of itself isn’t so bad; buggy or insecure software gets released all of the time. The problem with Microsoft is that they don’t fix their software until it gets public airplay. Quoting from the LA Times:

“Microsoft treats security problems as public relations problems,” said Bruce Schneier of Counterpane Internet Security in Cupertino, Calif. “They’ll fix a security problem insofar as it gets made public.”

Microsoft’s general way of dealing with security threats is to make legal maneuvers to prevent the world from finding out about them. You want to get their information about how to fix the problems they’ve saddled you with? You have to sign a non-disclosure agreement with them promising not to tell anyone if you find a new one.

This runs counter to the standard means of fixing problems: if a security hole is found on dozens of other Internet systems, the hole is publicized and a fix is released through the collective brainpower of the ‘Net, sometimes within hours. Microsoft, on the other hand, can take weeks or months to address an issue, and you can be sure that in that time the world’s computer crooks know about the problem. The one left in the dark is you.

Last year, the Code Red virus brought huge swaths of the Internet to its knees, leading to the following solution: tens of thousands of users (including me) had their ability to run a web server shut down by their Internet service providers.

I’ll repeat that. Even though most of us deliberately chose not to run Microsoft software on our web servers, and were therefore invulnerable to the virus, our web servers were shut down en masse. It’s the equivalent of having your phone service shut off because someone 100 miles away is making obscene phone calls.

But the big reason this is an issue is that the whole reason the Internet exists in the first place—the way it continues operating at all—is still due to a great deal of collective contributions. The web page you’re reading is based on a technology that was invented in 1992 and donated for free to the world. The means that web data uses to move from my server to your computer is also based on free technology. And so on.

The rules of this game are simple. You’re welcome to invent new stuff, and you’re welcome to keep it to yourself and try to make money off of it. But you don’t poison the well for everyone else.

Microsoft has written some decent software; I’m running two of their applications right now. But they’ve also been dumping big bags of arsenic into the public pool for a long time.

This is the stuff that runs police 911 networks, military response communications systems, financial systems, and dozens of crucial government networks, let alone the businesses and services that you depend on daily. Microsoft has made billions off of their monopoly, and they’ve wielded that monopoly to shield themselves from blame.

It’s time to call them to task, to force them to live up to the standards set for them by the people who built the network they profit from. If they can’t be shamed into accepting this responsibility, then let’s do it through the courts.

Today’s lesson on missed opportunities

As part of the run-up to the new PBS documentary series on Mark Twain, National Public Radio engaged in a little public broadcasting backscratching by interviewing Ken Burns on Morning Edition.

Bob Edwards mentioned that NPR was linking to the only known video of Mark Twain on their website. Sounded interesting, so I headed that way and landed on a Mark Twain fan site run by the Hannibal Courier-Post. (Who, I’m sure, must be thrilled that their name is now synonymous with serial killers.)

The video, of course, is silent, so you can thrill to the sight of Mr. Clemens wandering around his building and drinking tea with a few friends.

The cameraman, one Thomas Edison.

Now, I’m not one to tell Tom Edison he had the wrong idea, but the hell with a silent tea-drinking Twain. The two men were in the same room together! Tom, please, you should have hauled along your best audio recording spools and recorded a few hours of you and Sam, just shooting the breeze. That would have been priceless.

Blast from the past

I haven’t had a chance to play with this yet, but Todd Software has made my day by releasing a Merlin emulator for the Palm. Merlin, as any early 30something already knows, was a fantastic Parker Brothers handheld game back in the heyday of the 9-volt video game era. I can’t tell you the number of hours of my life this ate up in its first incarnation.

Liberal bias? I don’t think so.

Mike Kinsley published an interesting sidebar this week with a brief analysis of the issue—a hot button among conservatives—of liberal bias in the media. His conclusion, more or less, was “it’s there, it’s minor, get over it.”

It amazes me that the navel-gazers in the press tend to ignore what was old news ten years ago. Way back when I was a student at the Annenberg School for Communication, we were reading studies that reached the following conclusions.

  1. The people who write for the press tend to be predominantly liberal. (Kinsey makes this point as well.) There are obviously extreme variations depending on the location of the company and the media topic being covered, but the liberals outnumber the conservatives at most of the mainstream urban big-media outlets that set the pace of the news.
  2. Different studies have different conclusions about the result of this bias in the profession. Some liberal journalists say that they so effectively self-censor their own beliefs that their writing ends up tending conservative in its assumptions as a result. For example, a liberal journalist writing about a Clinton sex story might have thought it was unimportant, and to counter that belief he might include three right-wing sources in the story’s analysis instead of one.
  3. The ownership of this media is now almost entirely in the hands of large corporations, the leadership of which has a conservative slant much greater than the liberal slant of the journalists. Again, different studies have different conclusions on what effect this has. The main issue for both the media and media-watchers is whether the corporate side modifies the journalism in deferrence to its bottom line—i.e., will ABC News spike a story that is unflattering about a Disney property? The answer to this, by and large, is no, and heads get put on pikes when this rule is egregiously broken. But there are more subtle effects which are not as carefully watched.
  4. However, the point that is constantly missed is that the agenda for news is unabashedly conservative. The New York Times publishes “all the news that’s fit to print,” which begs the question, what is news?

Take a look at your newspaper’s sections. Chances are, they’ll be national, local, business, style (formerly called “women’s issues” in a more unenlightened time), and sports. Your national and local news will cover a nice swath of business news as well. It’s newsworthy that Alan Greenspan has lowered interest rates again, or sneezed facing north-northwest rather than east-southeast. But the analysis of this information is entirely done from the perspective of what’s important for corporations.

Now take a look at what’s being covered in your local free weekly, such as the City Paper. Chances are, you’ll see stories there that wouldn’t be considered newsworthy by your primary daily paper.

A story covering a corporate layoff will discuss whether it will improve the company’s stock, not the impact of the layoff in the community; it takes a major debacle like Enron’s destruction of employee pension funds, or the primary employer of a small town shutting down, to make the human impact of business newsworthy.

If you think that our definition of newsworthy is universal, I invite you to start reading European and South American newspapers.

So, liberal bias in the news? More of it please. It might even things up.

Make my PowerBook One with Everything

I’ve set my desktop background to cosmic spectrum green.

Scientists: Green is dominant color of stars
By Paul Recer, 1/10/02 (AP)

Astronomers at Johns Hopkins University said that averaging all the colors from the light of 200,000 galaxies shows that the current color of the universe is a sprightly green.

We haven’t been to a paint shop yet to see if there is a fancy name for it,” said [Dr. Ivan] Baldry, [Johns Hopkins]. He calls the color “cosmic spectrum green.”

Apple, Inc. concedes that I’m an American citizen

I was taken aback this morning by some standard legal boilerplate published on an Apple news site about a contest that Apple is running:

ELIGIBILITY: All entrants must be at least 18 years old and must be legal residents of the United States, including the District of Columbia. [emphasis added]

Typically, these sorts of legal clauses are only added when there’s been some sort of legal protest or confusion in the past, which implies that someone, somewhere, managed to think that people living in D.C. aren’t even legal residents of the United States, let alone citizens. That’s gotta take the cake.

They’re lying to us again.

Which is more worrisome: that our defenses aren’t as good as we think they are, or that the government is willing to lie to us about it?

From the initial Washington Post story about the Tampa plane crash, 1/6/02:

Capt. Kirstin Reimann of the North American Aerospace Defense Command said two F-15s were scrambled from Homestead Air Reserve Base as a precaution, but he declined to say whether they reached the scene before the crash.

From a follow-up story, 1/8/02:

The military command that sends fighter jets to respond to acts of terrorism did not learn of Saturday’s flight of a private plane into a Tampa office building until after the plane had crashed, officials said yesterday.

Turns out that the FAA decided that it wasn’t necessary to contact NORAD, since local authorities were on the case; therefore, it’s not the fault of the military that they didn’t get there. But I’m very concerned that every report prior to this one strongly implied that the jets were on the way.

If we have to take homeland news with this much salt, how bad is the Afghanistan news for our blood pressure?