Saturday, July 29, 2006

Comedic interlude: flashback to the Daily Show, 2004


From the Daily Show, the day after John Kerry was nominated as the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate. Host Jon Stewart flashed to reporter Steven Colbert, who was ostensibly standing in front of the White House:

Jon Stewart: Kerry could pose a serious threat.
Steven Colbert: [Talking like a biblical prophet, skies turning red behind him] Threat Jon? Threat? Tread carefully, newsman, lest your impudence embroil you in the coming battle tide. For the day is nigh when the armies of Rove shall come alive to claim their due. For lo! it has been foretold that the son of the forty-first king shall himself twice be crowned! The treasuries will be emptied! The ads unleashed! And the blue states will run red with the hundred million dollars of hellfire and retribution!

Friday, July 28, 2006

"They will figure it out on their own, the hard way"


It's interesting to contrast the wartime political process in Israel with that here in the U.S. When Prime Minister Ehud Olmert visited northern Israel Wednesday -- amid swarms of rocket attacks -- his statements echoed George W. Bush on September 20, 2001.

In a visit of support to the north on Wednesday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that "the IDF operation won't last for months and, even if it lasts for longer than we planned, we'll know how to match the solution to the citizens."

"I don't intend on announcing an end to the operation. They (Hizbullah) will figure it out on their own, the hard way..."

Benjamin Netanyahu, one of the leaders of the opposition party, backed Olmert's efforts:

...The government has set a goal to remove the threat from Israel's cities and its civilians, and specifically to remove the missile threat. I'm not going to second-guess them in the middle of the war. We are in the middle of a war...

...the presence of these missiles in Hezbollah's hands is an intolerable threat. If this is resolved, when that missile arsenal is intact, you know it's just a question of time when Hezbollah will fire them again, when it suits their Iranian and Syrian patron...

I'm trying to remember what it's like to have a loyal opposition party. One that puts national security above partisan demagoguery. One that provides a home to hawks and doves alike. One that provides a haven for centrists.

And I'm trying to recall a mainstream media that offered similar balance, as opposed to the "zero-percenters" that comprise thought-leadership for today's mediacrats.

I'm having trouble coming up with any examples of loyal opposition here in the U.S. At least since, oh, late 2001. And that's tragic.

So when Olmert says they'll figure it out on their own -- the hard way -- I hope that applies to the opposition party as well. I pray that it won't take another 3,000 dead on American soil to get them to recalibrate their loyalties.

The disproportionate fallacy


Krauthammer has penned a magnificent response to the appeasers and terrorist-backers who call Israeli counterattacks 'disproportionate':

What other country sustains 1,500 indiscriminate rocket attacks into its cities — every one designed to kill, maim and terrorize civilians — and is then vilified by the world when it tries to destroy the enemy’s infrastructure and strongholds with precision-guided munitions... ?

...When the United States was attacked at Pearl Harbor, it did not respond with a parallel “proportionate” attack on a Japanese naval base. It launched a four-year campaign that killed millions of Japanese, reduced Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to a cinder, and turned the Japanese home islands to rubble and ruin.

Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal and moral — to carry the fight until the aggressor is disarmed and so disabled that it cannot threaten one’s security again. That’s what it took with Japan.

Britain was never invaded by Germany in World War II. Did it respond to the blitz and V-1 and V-2 rockets with “proportionate” aerial bombardment of Germany? Of course not. Churchill orchestrated the greatest land invasion in history that flattened and utterly destroyed Germany...

...In perhaps the most blatant terror campaign from the air since the London blitz, Hezbollah is raining rockets on Israeli cities and villages. These rockets are packed with ball bearings that can penetrate automobiles and shred human flesh. They are meant to kill and maim. And they do...

Read every word.

Krauthammer: The double standard

Thursday, July 27, 2006

LA Times Happy Dance


The invaluable RadioBlogger has posted some fascinating graphs. They depict the catastrophic circulation woes of everyone's favorite whipping boy: the LA Dog Trainer. It's popular to term climatology graphs "hockey-sticks," but that's only because folks haven't seen this illustration of an editorial debacle of extraordinary proportions (hat tip: Hugh Hewitt).

Israel, Hezbollah, and the UN


The outcry from the deaths of UN observers in Lebanon has been predictable. Kofi Annan all but accused the Israelis of targeting the UN, calling the incident, "apparently deliberate." The China Daily said, "Israel has gone too far." And the New York Times' Maureen Dowd claimed Karl Rove had personally executed the observers. Well, I'm just guessing about that last part because I'm not among the dozen folks that have subscribed to Times Deselect.

What you're not hearing from the mainstream press is that Hezbollah -- true to form -- used the UN observers as human shields. According to the UN's own report, Hezbollah was firing from the observers' positions:

...Another UN position of the Ghanaian battalion in the area of Marwahin in the western sector was also directly hit by one mortar round from the Hezbollah side last night. The round did not explode, and there were no casualties or material damage. Another 5 incidents of firing close to UN positions from the Israeli side were reported yesterday. It was also reported that Hezbollah fired from the vicinity of four UN positions at Alma ash Shab, Tibnin, Brashit, and At Tiri...

It could be just me, but if I'm a UN observer and I notice Hezbollah lobbing mortar shells from a position just yards away, my digital watch will display the time, "Get to steppin'."

A Canadian General interviewed on radio independently confirmed that the UN Observer Post was used by Hezbollah:

Retired Canadian Major General Lewis Mackenzie was interviewed on CBC radio, and had some very interesting news about the UN observer post hit by Israeli shells; the Canadian peacekeeper killed there had previously emailed Mackenzie telling him that Hizballah was using their post as cover...

The General put it bluntly: "They use the UN as shields."

And what of Kofi Annan? CNS is reporting that he could have ordered peacekeepers to leave at any time:

The four United Nations peacekeepers killed in an Israeli attack on their outpost were required to stay at that post "until they were ordered by the [U.N.] secretary general to withdraw," said a member of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization on Wednesday.

But the peacekeepers apparently never received such an order, despite the fierce cross-border fighting that erupted in southern Lebanon two weeks ago...

While you won't be reading any of this in the New York Times -- barring someone dumping 55-gallon drums of truth serum in the Manhattan water supply -- rest assured that DowdCo will find a way to blame it all on Chimpy McHalliburton. Heaven knows, there are a couple of years of useful life remaining on her teleprompter's endless tape reel.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Net Neutrality: the Wireless Business is Berry, Berry Good


Over at NewsForge, James Glass offers a remarkable insight that is a powerful argument for net neutrality:

...It turns out that we have a privately owned and controlled network all around us, one that closely mirrors the technical functionality of the Internet, but where there has never been a requirement for net neutrality: the US cellular phone network.

Almost all cell phones sold in the developed world have the ability to send and receive SMS (short message service) text messages. SMS is gaining popularity in the US, but only as a way to send quick messages to friends. So why aren't there a wealth of amazing and interactive services available for mobile devices? Why is there no MySpace, Craigslist, Amazon, Flikr, or eBay accessible through this network? Why are cell phone payment systems and email systems nearly nonexistent? Why haven't charities raised money or awareness of their causes through this system?

It's simple. Because the cell phone carriers control what services are allowed to use their networks. There is no net neutrality on the cell phone network...

Preee-cisely. And that’s what the future holds for the American Internet should the cable/telco duopoly get its way. Heaven knows, they've certainly spent enough:

...According to Campaign Media Analysis Group, [the carriers] have spent up to $45 million to buy anti-Net Neutrality ads nationwide. A report by Bloomberg News, estimates an additional $50 million spent on telco and cable lobbyists. Add to this tally the millons in campaign contributions made by anti-Neutrality companies like AT&T, Verizon, BellSouth, Cisco, Comcast and Time Warner.

On the other hand, the many groups that constitute the SavetheInternet coalition have spent less than $200,000 in our grassroots campaign to support Net Neutrality... That means that for every $1 spent by the grassroots to defend Net Neutrality, the phone and cable companies have spent approximately $500 to drown it...

Remarkable! These blokes have spent nine figures and they still haven't gotten their way. Appears their oft-revised business plans have to get pitched into the fireplace again. This is fun. Let's continue to make 'em bleed their wallets dry.

You know, if their plans go any further off course, the telcos will be looking at leveraged buy-outs of the hub-cap industry soon. I almost feel sorry for them. That is, if I could muster sympathy for has-been monopolists who haven't demonstrated a scintilla of Internet innovation apart from inventing new forms of lobbying.

Mainstream Media Memewatch


Regarding Israel's "disproportionate response" meme:

...A senior Hezbollah official said Tuesday the guerrilla group did not expect Israel to react so strongly to its capture of two Israeli soldiers... "The truth is--let me say this clearly--we didn't even expect (this) response.... that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us," said Komati...

The terrorist went on to complain that the Israelis' response was disproportionate. Later, the Hezbollah leader joined hands with Jacques Chirac to sing a chorus of "Kumbaya."

Meme: On the never-ending topic of WMDs in Iraq:

Jennifer Harper of the Washington Times reports on a Harris Poll that, among other things, shows that 50% of respondents--up from 36% last year--believe that "Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded."

And 63% of respondents were aware that mainstream media outlets had censored news that Saddam had scores of WMDs and Joe Wilson lied about Saddam's efforts to procure uranium.

Meme: It was all an Israeli plot:

Hezbollah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah was defiant late Tuesday in televised comments, accusing Israel of preparing for months for the ongoing assault on Lebanon...

'The manoeuvres the Israeli army were carrying out in the past few months were aimed at preparing a war on Lebanon in September or October,' Nasrallah said in a televised speech aired on Hezbollah's al-Manar television channel... 'It was not because the capturing of the two soldiers.'

Never mind that Iran and Syria turned southern Lebanon into a single seamless missile base. And just ignore the fact that Hezbollah rained rockets into northern Israel for months on end. And don't bother noting that the terrorists attacked Israeli bases while killing and kidnapping soldiers. It's all Israel's fault... not to mention Karl Rove!

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

New York Times Dupe of the Week: Bob Herbert


First it was the New York Times' Nicholas Kristof. Next, pea-brained op-ed hack Bob Herbert joined the chorus. Their lyrics? That Israel's campaign to eradicate Hezbollah has gone too far... and (who else?) Bush & company are to blame.

A few weeks ago, I noted the observation that the three political columnists for the Times -- Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, and Bob Herbert -- had written a total of 156 columns on the Bush administration over the course of 18 months. Every single one -- all 156 -- were negative.

So it comes as no great surprise that Herbert finds a way to blame the administration for Hezbollah's rocket attacks and kidnappings, which precipitated Israel's counterattacks. Herbert's script is so predictable he could have authored it 18 months ago and simply waited for the predictable escalation of terror attacks to mail it in to his editor-in-name-only.

...It’s too late now... but Israel could have used a friend in the early stages of its war with Hezbollah — a friend who could have tugged at its sleeve and said: 'O.K. We understand. But enough.' That friend should have been the United States...

Herbert is not learned enough to acknowledge the obvious: that Hezbollah's war on Israel is simply a proxy effort orchestrated by Iran. Ahmadinejad, Iran's puppet president, has casually stated on multiple occasions that Israel should be wiped from the face of the Earth. So when Hezbollah fires Iranian missiles, utilizes Iranian troops, and otherwise leverages the fruits of Tehran's war-machine, it all flies right over poor Herbert's head.

Stunningly, Herbert isn't aware of any of this... even though it just appeared in the New York Times. Herbert can't be bothered to actually read the news... it might interfere with his Bush-bashing meme!

...But the unnecessary slaughter of innocents, whether by Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, American forces in Iraq or the Israeli defense forces, is always wrong, and should never be tolerated. So civilized people cannot in good conscience stand by and silently watch as hundreds of innocents are killed and thousands more threatened by the spasm of destruction unleashed by Israel in Lebanon...

Herbert writes around the fact that Israel carefully tries to avoid civilian casualties. And he simply glosses over Hezbollah's use of human shields (Q: do you have rockets stored in one of the rooms of your house? A: if you answered yes, expect to get bombed in a counterattack).

And Herbert, of course, casually ignores the dozens of other conflagrations that have targeted civilians in the global war he dares not mention: Mumbai, London, Kashmir, Thailand, Beslan, the U.S., Uzbekistan, Darfur, Madrid, Bali, Somalia, Australia, Indonesia, the Philippines, et. al.

Let me see if I can make this clear to Herbert: Israel, the US, the UK and other allies in the war on terror studiously try to avoid civilian casualties. Hezbollah and its puppet-masters in Damascus and Tehran glory in civilian casualties. In fact, their use of human shields encourages both Muslim and Jewish deaths, all of which become public relations victories when marketed by useful dupes like Herbert.

But Herbert's brain, apparently addled from years of watching CNN, can't be bothered straining his quads to get off his derriere and do actual research  -- heavens, no -- that might entail having to read some history and truly understand the backdrop of these events. That's way too much work for a hack like Herbert.

...As a true friend of Israel, the task of the United States is to work as strenuously as possible to find real solutions to Israel’s security. The first step in that process, as far as the current crisis is concerned, would logically have been to try and broker a cease-fire.

But the compulsive muscle-flexers in the Bush crowd were contemptuous of that idea. Always hot for war, and astonishingly indifferent to its consequences, they egged Israel on. That was not the behavior of a friend...

The Israelis withdrew from southern Lebanon to create peace. They withdrew from Gaza to create peace. But instead of building schools, businesses, and the other infrastructure that would benefit their populations, Iran's proxies turned these regions into missile bases.

There are 10,000 to 15,000 rockets and missiles in the areas from which Israel withdrew. And now Israel is doing the entire world a favor by eradicating Hezbollah and its supply lines.

And only useful dupes like Herbert can ignore those facts. Put simply, he and his ilk are 0 for 156. If there's a Pulitzer Prize for moral equivalence, Herbert is a lock for the 2006 award with this paean to terrorism.

To call Herbert, Dowd and Rich laughingstocks is to overestimate their worth.

Jeff Jacoby: are you a 'Chicken Hawk'?


Straight out of Beantown, Jeff Jacoby weighs on on the Moonbats' favorite meme for villifying the likes of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove; he asks, "Are you a ‘chicken hawk?’" (hat tip: LGF):

“Chicken hawk“ isn’t an argument. It is a slur — a dishonest and incoherent slur... US foreign policy would be more hawkish, not less, if decisions about war and peace were left up to [only] members of the armed forces. Soldiers tend to be politically conservative, hard-nosed about national security, and confident that American arms make the world safer and freer...

The cry of “chicken hawk” is dishonest for another reason: It is never aimed at those who oppose military action. But there is no difference, in terms of the background and judgment required, between deciding to go to war and deciding not to. If only those who served in uniform during wartime have the moral standing and experience to back a war, then only they have the moral standing and experience to oppose a war. Those who mock the views of “chicken hawks“ ought to be just as dismissive of “chicken doves.”

...You don’t need medical training to express an opinion on healthcare. You don’t have to be on the police force to comment on matters of law and order. You don’t have to be a parent or a teacher or a graduate to be heard on the educational controversies of the day. You don’t have to be a journalist to comment on this or any other column.

And whether you have fought for your country or never had that honor, you have every right to weigh in on questions of war and peace. Those who cackle “Chicken hawk!” are not making an argument. They are merely trying to stifle one, and deserve to be ignored.

Monday, July 24, 2006

Windows features in the security headlines: LSP & ADS


Technology news sites are highlighting a couple of longstanding Windows features that are being leveraged by malware authors. The features are layered service providers (LSP) and alternate data streams (ADS), which provide methods for network monitoring and file-hiding, respectively.

A little background is in order. Microsoft products have been under heavy attack lately by hackers using "fuzzing tools" such as Metasploit. Most recently, the author of Metasploit promised to release a browser exploit each day during July. So far, he's made good on his promise. Most of the attacks have targeted Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

Fuzzing tools perform brute-force alteration of file content such as web pages, Powerpoint files, etc. Their intent is to coax the native application to crash. Once a crash is detected, the malware author can attempt to inject executable code into the file. This would be a typical method for creating a trojan horse.

eWeek: Zero-Day PowerPoint attack uses LSP


A couple of days ago, eWeek noted an ominous zero-day attack against PowerPoint. Its intent appears to be corporate espionage. When the PowerPoint file is opened by a user, malware named Trojan.Riler.F installs itself as a layered service provider (LSP):

An LSP is a legitimate system driver linked deep into the networking services of Windows. It is used primarily to allow the operating system to connect to other computers, but virus writers have found a way to make malicious programs work as LSPs to hijack sensitive data during transmission.
Symantec, of Cupertino, Calif., said the Trojan also opens a back door on the compromised system and connects to the "soswxyz.8800.org" domain. The Trojan then listens and waits for commands from a remote attacker... [it] logs keyboard strokes, hijacks sensitive system data and transmit the information back to a remote server hosted in China...

Consider LSPs a lower-level form of Microsoft's browser helper objects (BHOs). BHOs are well-known in anti-virus circles as a primary means for infecting Internet Explorer with spyware- and adware-delivery systems. But BHOs focus primarily on users' web surfing. LSPs, on the other hand, are less well-known but far more powerful. They allow an attacker to inspect and/or hijack any  network traffic: instant messages, POP/SMTP email, etc.

Windows is the only operating system that supports LSPs and BHOs. It is unclear why Microsoft added support for low-level network monitoring features without also providing easy methods for reviewing and uninstalling packages that leverage them.

ZDNet: Rootkits hide using ADS


ZDNet reports that rootkits are getting better at hiding. The term 'rootkit' is a catch-all phrase that Wikipedia defines as, "...a set of software tools intended to conceal running processes, files or system data, thereby helping an intruder to maintain access to a system whilst avoiding detection." Whilst? Anyhow, ZDNet specifically describes the malware known as Rustock:

...To avoid detection, [it] runs no system processes, but runs its code inside a driver and kernel threads, Florio wrote. It also uses alternate data streams (Ed: emphasis mine) instead of hidden files and avoids using application programming interfaces (APIs). Today's detection tools look for system processes, hidden files and hooks into APIs, according to Florio's post...

What exactly are Alternate Data Streams (ADS)? ADS has been around since the advent of the NT file system (NTFS). Reportedly, they were added to NTFS in order to provide compatibility with HFS, the old Macintosh Hierarchical File System. HFS used multiple "forks" to manage its files: the data fork held the payload of the file while the resource fork held the file's metadata.

Is ADS a newly discovered threat? Actually, not at all. ADS has been recognized as a potential security threat for at least eight years:

...In July 1998, InfoWorld Security Watch columnists Stuart McClure and Joel Scambray wrote that NTFS alternate data streams present a threat to information security. McClure and Scambray maintain that malicious users can use alternate streams to hide infected code and that no existing antivirus product can detect or disinfect viruses within an alternate stream. Two years passed, and no one took steps to resolve the situation. In August 2000, two Czech hackers, under the pseudonyms Benny and Ratter, created the W2K.Stream virus. This virus, which cleverly uses alternate streams to carry infected files, is a harsh reminder of the NTFS feature's vulnerability...

That wasn't it. Windows IT Pro carried a similar warning in 2001. Ray Zadjmool, writing in Windows Security, rang the alarm claxons again in 2004. Yet he could accurately call the feature, "relatively unknown."

The following year (2005), Rick Cook could still call ADS 'little-known' despite the fact that SecurityFocus had explicitly called out the ADS threat:

...There has been a marked increase in the use of these streams by malicious hackers wanting to store their files once they have compromised a computer. Not only that, it has also been seen that viruses and other types of malware are being placed there as well...

...In the interest again of visually showing what these streams are and how they can appear once detected, a screenshot of before and after will be shown. The tools lads and lns were used to look for the streams on the Windows 2000 machine, both before and after the hack...

So, while ZDNet's article this week is noteworthy, ADS is hardly a new threat.

The real question: why does Microsoft continue to support ADS? Or, at the very least, why does it not provide a method for disabling its use?

Final Thoughts


If there are a few lessons we can draw from the experiences of LSP and ADS (and BHOs, for that matter), I'd propose the following:
  • Have an external security audit on software features that expose data to third-parties
  • Provide methods for completely disabling features that expose said data
  • Prompt the end-user whenever an application requests access to shared data
  • Provide a way for end users to review which applications are using data exposure tools
  • Offer end users an ability to opt out of sharing data with third-parties
  • Log everything 

In the mean time, beware the PowerPoint from parts unknown.

Sunday, July 23, 2006

Frankston on net neutrality: our crowded sidewalks


The co-inventor of the spreadsheet -- Bob Frankston -- has weighed in on net neutrality. His analogy is excellent:

I stepped out to take my stroll and was immediately accosted (in the nicest way, of course) by a gaggle of TSP (Transportation Service Provider) agents vying to sell me the use of their sidewalks. Actually, they called it a Transportation Service -- I didn't have to worry about the details of the sidewalk itself. They realized that I was confused by the ability and the need to choose my sidewalk provider. They reacted as if they were speaking to a dunce and explained that competition was necessary in order to keep the prices down. If they had to share one sidewalk they couldn't guarantee the Quality of Stroll and QoS is very important. Imagine if I started to go to the grocery and had to slow down because someone was walking too slowly. I was about to ask why I couldn't just walk around them when I saw the big "do not walk on the Astroturf signs". I had to limit myself to the QoS provided by the TSPs. Sidewalks are scarce and they had to limit the quality in order to assure that everyone gets "fair" use of the scarce supply of sidewalks -- you can only run three or four sidewalks from the town center to each house -- any more and you'd lose the remaining 10% of the land...

In a separate article, Frankston also takes the FCC to task:

...the FCC was chartered in 1934 to assure that we had a viable telecommunications industry which would provide us with services like telephone calls and radio broadcasting. There was no need for giving us access to the transport itself...

The FCC is acting as if it is 1934 and is treating the Internet as just another service as if it were a TV station. It cannot come to terms with the idea that Internet connectivity is fundamental and that we can create services ourselves. It insists we must limit our choices to the carriers’ offerings...

Saturday, July 22, 2006

YouTube is blowing up


I mean that in a good way. Ad Age is reporting that YouTube -- the incredibly snappy and friendly video-sharing site -- is now the fastest growing web site:

The popularity of YouTube is growing at an astronomical rate, as web traffic to the video-sharing site grew 75% just in the week ending July 16, from 7.3 million to 12.8 million unique visitors, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. Traffic to the site has grown nearly threefold -- 297% -- since January, making it the fastest-growing site online...

Keys to its success? Many of the obvious ones: media delivery via Macromedia Flash (an excellent and ubiquitous video-player), superb navigation, stunning previews, subscriptions, community-based ratings, etc.

But the real key is YouTube's tacit endorsement of viral links. If you like a video, you've got multiple ways to slap it onto your own website: a hyperlink and an embedded object are both provided on each and every video page. I don't know if anyone's bothered to count how many sites are now using these features, but I'd venture to guess it's over 10,000 (updated later: shows you how much I know - a Google Search tallies closer to 100,000!).

Only a year-and-a-half old (incredible!), the site was founded by Chad Hurley and Steve Chen who simply wanted an easy way to share videos with their friends. Certainly continues in the theme of net neutrality: successful sites that were built not by corporate behemoths, but by motivated individuals (think Digg, eBay, etc.).

Some personal favorites? Daily Show: Stephen Colbert on Bloggers, Cubicle Wars, and The Golf-Ball Prank.

Top five things Linux can learn from Microsoft


Thoroughly clear-eyed look at where Linux (and the open-source community in general) must play catch-up with Redmond. The quick list:

#1 MSDN
#2 Common interface (e.g., Gnome, KDE, ...)
#3 Common (file) format(s)
#4 Marketing
#5 OEM Support

Read it all: Top five things Linux can learn from Microsoft

Friday, July 21, 2006

Open source in the national interest


The DOD has released its official report (PDF) on open technology development. The roadmap offers a ringing endorsement of open-source software (OSS). Let's skip ahead to the conclusion:

To summarize: OSS and open source development methodologies are important to the National Security and National Interest of the U.S. for the following reasons:

* Enhances agility of IT industries to more rapidly adapt and change to user needed capabilities.

* Strengthens the industrial base by not protecting industry from competition. Makes industry more likely to compete on ideas and execution versus product lock-in.

* Adoption recognizes a change in our position with regard to balance of trade of IT.

* Enables DoD to secure the infrastructure and increase security by understanding what is actually in the source code of software installed in DoD networks.

* Rapidly respond to adversary actions as well as rapid changes in the technology industrial base.

Back in '04, Canada's Defense R&D offered a similar assessment.

The ultimate nutrition site


If you want to figure out just how healthy that Cap'n Crunch cereal is... or how much fat is in a Twix bar... the Nutrition Data site is without peer.

Its visualization tools for illustrating nutritional profiles are stunningly cool. Check it out.

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Microsoft's guidelines for future Windows development


Eric Bangeman, writing at Ars Technica, has posted Microsoft's new Guidelines for future Windows development. From all appearances, Microsoft hopes to strike a delicate balance. It must walk the tightrope between encouraging competition but -- presumably -- not too much competition. The first of three principles ("Choice for Computer Manufacturers and Customers") reads:

Microsoft is committed to designing Windows and licensing it on contractual terms so as to make it easy to install non-Microsoft® programs and to configure Windows-based PCs to use non-Microsoft programs instead of or in addition to Windows features.

1. Installation of any software.

2. Easy access.

3. Defaults. Microsoft will design Windows so as to enable computer manufacturers and users to set non-Microsoft programs to operate by default in key categories.

4. Exclusive promotion of non-Microsoft programs.

5. Business terms. Microsoft will not retaliate against any computer manufacturer that supports non-Microsoft software.

Tenet 5 is particularly interesting, given accusations leveled against Microsoft.

On that note, let's dial up March 15, 1991 on the way-back machine, Mr. Sherman. And let me call your attention to a New York Times article from that very day entitled, "Microsoft's Tactics Questioned by Rivals":

...Until two years ago, Alpha Software was selling a program known as Alphaworks, a combined spreadsheet, word processor and data base, to personal computer companies, which packaged it with their machines.

But when Microsoft came out with a similar program called Microsoft Works, Alpha's biggest customer, Hyundai, shifted to Microsoft and Alpha lost a bid for another big contract. Realizing it could not compete, Alpha sold the program to the stronger Lotus, which has had some success with it...

If I recall correctly, AlphaWorks was a PC Magazine Editor's Choice (tied with Microsoft Works). The real story behind Hyundai's conversion from AlphaWorks is especially interesting, but I'll leave it to the principals at Alpha Software to tell that tale.

I commend Microsoft for clearly enunciating their commitment to ethical business practices. Better late than never.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Helen Thomas takes on the Arab Street


The invaluable Newsbusters site noted yesterday's White House press room incident, as Presidential Spokesperson Tony Snow upbraided Helen Thomas (...her skin looks so good for her age... I wonder what her secret is? Formaldehyde? Oops. Did I say that out loud? So much for stream-of-consciousness blogging...):

QUESTION: The United States is not that helpless. It could have stopped the bombardments of Lebanon. We have that much control with the Israelis.

SNOW: I don’t think so.

QUESTION: We have gone for collective punishment against all of Lebanon and Palestine. And what’s happening - and that’s the perception of the United States.

SNOW: Well, thank you for the Hezbollah view...

On the other hand, there's Ahmed Al-Jarallah, Editor-in-Chief of Kuwait's Arab Times, endorsing Israel's military operations in its self-defense:

A battle between supporters and opponents of these adventurers has begun, starting from Palestine to Tehran passing through Syria and Lebanon. This war was inevitable as the Lebanese government couldn't bring Hezbollah within its authority and make it work for the interests of Lebanon. Similarly leader of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas has been unable to rein in the Hamas Movement.

Unfortunately we must admit that in such a war the only way to get rid of "these irregular phenomena" is what Israel is doing. The operations of Israel in Gaza and Lebanon are in the interest of people of Arab countries and the international community...

Lesson learned: I guess the Arab Street lies to the right of Helen Thomas and the Moonbattery.

Did Comcast censor an ABC News Broadcast?


Think net neutrality laws aren't warranted? Here's a taste of the future; a future in which the cable/teclo duopoly calls the shots in terms of content permitted to transit their pipes (oops, I meant tubes*).

Preston Gralla reports that Comcast may have censored a news broadcast critical of its service operation:

Comcast recently censored ABC's Nightline on its Comcast Broadband TV service by deleting the part of the broadcast that said a Comcast technician was sleeping on a customer's couch instead of installing residential broadband.

The Consumerist shows both the original broadcast and censored broadcast.

In the original, someone was interviewed who noted that a Comcast technician fell asleep on the couch because he had called Comcast technical support, and was put on hold for an hour...


Networking and Telecom Blog: Comcast censors ABC News

* Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," offered his take on why it took so long for Senator Stevens to receive his staff's email: "Maybe it's because you do not seem to know jack**** about computers or the Internet ... but hey, you're just the guy in charge of regulating it."

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Gingrich says it's World War III


Historian, author, and erstwhile 2008 Presidential candidate (dark horse is an understatement) Newt Gingrich says its time everyone recognized we are in the midst of World War III. This is obvious to most, except for outlets like the New York Times, who casually ignore the gaping hole a few blocks from their offices and instead concentrate on villifying the administration, the military, and Republicans (not necessarily in that order). One hopes for a day when the Times would spend 1% of their time on exposing enemy plots, rather than US national security secrets.

Gingrich said in the coming days he plans to speak out publicly, and to the Administration, about the need to recognize that America is in World War III... He lists wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, this week's bomb attacks in India, North Korean nuclear threats, terrorist arrests and investigations in Florida, Canada and Britain, and violence in Israel and Lebanon as evidence of World War III. He said Bush needs to deliver a speech to Congress and "connect all the dots" for Americans... He said the reluctance to put those pieces together and see one global conflict is hurting America's interests...

These totalitarian regimes, whether operating alone or in tandem, pose an obvious and ominous threat to civilization. Gingrich is right to hope for increased emphasis on these conflicts as a single, unified war against extremists who pray for death, chaos, and the end of human rights.

Words of Wisdom from Mark Steyn


The eminently readable Mark Steyn appearing on the Hugh Hewitt show (hat tip: RadioBlogger, whose fingers must be bloody stumps from all the transcript-typing):

...in 20 years time, they'll ask us what we were doing in the year 2006. Some of us were worried about radical [extremists], and some of us were worried about Al Gore's global warming, and the voting machines, and Dick Cheney. And one of us will be right, and the other will be wrong. And the reality of this situation is it's nothing to do with Bush and Cheney. It's happening in India. It's happening in Israel. It's happening in Bali. It's happening in Russia. It's a planetary-wide problem, and it's nothing to do with Bush and Cheney stealing chads, or any of this other rubbish they go on about...

This is exactly why I wrote the article entitled "The Stockdale Paradox."

London, Beslan, Mumbai, the World Trade Center, Islamabad, Haifa, Madrid, the Pentagon... the list goes on and on and on, growing every day.

But maybe the problem will simply go away if we ignore it. After all, that seems to be the obstruction opposition party's take.