<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Stoss&#039; Home &#187; geek</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stoss.ca/wp/category/geek/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stoss.ca/wp</link>
	<description>The Musings of a Techie Canuck</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:53:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s all about Game 1</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2012/its-all-about-game-1</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2012/its-all-about-game-1#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 15:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Math]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=376</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I recently read a book on some misconceptions of randomness called: &#8216;A Drunkard&#8217;s Walk: How randomness rules our lives&#8216;. One point that stuck out at me was a section on how sporting events like championships series in the NBA or the World Series  etc. are a horrible measure of which team is better. That really [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recently read a book on some misconceptions of randomness called: &#8216;A Drunkard&#8217;s Walk: <em>How randomness rules our lives</em>&#8216;. One point that stuck out at me was a section on how sporting events like championships series in the NBA or the World Series  etc. are a horrible measure of which team is better. That really seemed interesting to me.</p>
<p>Here are the basics from the book: Forget for a second whether it is a best of 3, 5 or 7 or whatever series. How many times have you heard an announcer say something like &#8220;Winning the first game gives the winning team a huge momentum&#8221;, or &#8220;Only &lt;small number&gt; times in history has a team come back from a 3-0 deficit to win the &lt; insert championship&gt;&#8221; ? It actually has nothing to do with momentum! It has to do with statistics. Speaking statistically the team to win the 1st game in a 7 game series has a 66% chance of winning the series (ie 2 out of 3 times). The book goes into the math of this, but essentially it is because of all the possible combinations of winning/losing that could happen in a 7 game series once you know the outcome of the 1st game, 66% of the outcomes will end with that team winning.</p>
<p>I was shocked at this! Could stats really prove that a weaker team is more likely to win a series simply by winning the first game? So, as a geek, I wrote a computer simulation to test this. I set it to play 100 million World Series where the teams were completely evenly matched (ie. 50-50 chance of either team winning) and then took the metrics. Below is one example, but all of the outcomes I ran were almost identical to this:</p>
<blockquote>
<div id="_mcePaste"><strong>Team 1 Wins</strong>: 50006154 (50%)</div>
<div><strong>Team 2 Wins</strong>: 49993846 (50%)</div>
<div id="_mcePaste"><strong>Team1 Wins First Game And Wins Series</strong>: 32821540 (66%)</div>
<div><strong>Team2 Wins First Game And Wins Series</strong>: 32805104 (66%)</div>
<div><strong>% 1st team to win wins series</strong>: <span style="color: #ff0000;"><strong>65.626644%</strong></span></div>
</blockquote>
<p>You can see that the teams won each roughly 50% of the time and <em>66%</em> of the time the 1st team to win, wins the series! The book holds up. So if you are a betting person, this mean waiting until game 1 is over, then betting on the team  that won for all of the remaining games and 66% of the time you will come out ahead!</p>
<p>Reduce this to a 5 game series and you are now 70% likely for the first winner to win and to a 3 game series 75%.</p>
<p>Now all of this is assuming the teams are of identical skill, which of course is impossible to actually tangibly measure</p>
<p>But just for some food for thought let&#8217;s look at what happens when I give Team 2 an advantage:</p>
<table border="1">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th>T2&#8242;s Advantage</th>
<th>T2&#8242;s Wins overall</th>
<th>T1 wins 1st and wins series</th>
<th>T2 wins 1st and wins series</th>
<th>1st to win wins series</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>51%</td>
<td>53%</td>
<td>63%</td>
<td>67%</td>
<td>65%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>55%</td>
<td>61%</td>
<td>55%</td>
<td>74%</td>
<td>66%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>60%</td>
<td>71%</td>
<td>45%</td>
<td>82%</td>
<td>67%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>So what does this mean? It means even if a team is &#8220;better&#8221; than another team by a factor of 6-4 if the underdog wins the first game they are still 45% likely to win the series. That&#8217;s seems like a pretty decent shot for an underdog (regardless of Hollywood&#8217;s obsession with the underdog having a 99.9% change of winning).</p>
<p>So when does this advantage go away? If I reset the teams to even strength it isn&#8217;t until the best of 35 games (World Snooker Championship is best of 35) that the first game winner only has a 56% advantage. After that the curve gets really steep. At the best of 505 games (253 wins) the first team to win has a 51% chance of winning the series. I started to graph the limit, but got bored.</p>
<p>Keep in mind this is done all by simulator, no momentum, no &#8220;home vs away&#8221;, no external factors like weather, media etc. So, Does this hold up?  Using Wikipedia I went through and dug up the first winners of every series&#8230; Out of 105 World Series 67 first game winners have gone on to win, which is 63%. Isn&#8217;t math fun?</p>
<p>This was just one of the amazing bits of this book, and I highly recommend it. It analyzes in detail the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem" target="_blank">Monty Hall Problem</a> and various other mathematical quandries that are so seemingly simple that you just can&#8217;t help but get them wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2012/its-all-about-game-1/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Message on &#8216;Messages&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/a-message-on-messages</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/a-message-on-messages#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>About a year ago I spoke about Google Wave, and how I would be interested in seeing where this lead. It had a power that no technology had at that point, and yet it failed. I still think the technology will persist, potentially seeping its way more into the Google Chat app or integrated with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About a year ago I spoke about <a href="http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future" target="_blank">Google Wave</a>, and how I would be interested in seeing where this lead. It had a power that no technology had at that point, and yet <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/update-on-google-wave.html" target="_blank">it failed</a>. I still think the technology will persist, potentially seeping its way more into the Google Chat app or integrated with the new Chrome OS to provide the highest possible levels of collaboration. But we will wait and see there.</p>
<p>The one thing that I think hurt Wave more than anything though was the separate interface. Wave had a different URL, required a separate session login (even though the credentials were the same) and, somewhat ironically, provided no collaboration between existing GMail/GoogleChat and other Google Social Media offerings. People already have too many pages to check, adding one more put a nail in Wave&#8217;s coffin while it was still being born&#8230;</p>
<p>Now, just over one year after that failed prediction I will make another.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.facebook.com/about/messages/" target="_blank"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-367" title="Messages" src="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Messages-300x55.png" alt="Facebook Messages" width="300" height="55" /></a></p>
<p>Facebook launched &#8216;Messages&#8217; yesterday to much discussion in the technology world. The advantages are clear: Facebook only has one interface, it&#8217;s portable, persistent and it has a running start at <em>500 million users</em> (more than Google, Hotmail, AOL, Yahoo etc.). But it also has its disadvantages: <em>Trust</em>.</p>
<p>While I still advocate that Facebook is not as evil and malicious as Privacy Commissioners around the globe believe, I am the first to admit that it isn&#8217;t a widely accepted, reputable source for information. For example: A picture of you with 3 shots in your hands, motor-boating the Molson girls does not always mix well with sending your resume to a prospective employer or a chat with your mother about the date and time for your grandmother&#8217;s 80th birthday party.</p>
<p>Will this be the GMail Killer that Facebook wants us to believe it will? I doubt it. The first iteration of Messages appears to be missing the key aspects that make email, and GMail&#8217;s fantastic application around it, the powerful and useful tool it is. Most notably abolished is something as simple as <a href="http://www.facebook.com/help/?faq=19048" target="_blank">the subject line</a>&#8230;Contrary to <a href="http://www.facebook.com/help/?faq=19037" target="_blank">Zuckerberg&#8217;s vision</a>, all conversations are not a perpetually flowing set of ideas. I speak with my friends and colleagues on many subjects and aligning them in a &#8220;history&#8221; as one large conversation without a varying designation isn&#8217;t logical, nor useful. Remembering a conversation based on timeline is a lot less intuitive then remembering based on a subject, GMail label, or a Hotmail folder.</p>
<p>So, my prediction: This is a useful add-on to the Goliath of Facebook which will continue to reign as social media heavyweight champion, but replacing email is a long way off. That being said I&#8217;ve signed up for an invite and will give it the &#8216;Ole College Try&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/a-message-on-messages/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Protection Against Protection</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/protection-against-protection</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/protection-against-protection#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 20:16:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=295</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The US Federal Trade Commission recently released a report about how online/virtual &#8216;worlds&#8217; protect underage children from harmful or explicit images. They investigated the mechanisms these companies put in place to ensure that children 13 and under did not access &#8220;things they shouldn&#8217;t.&#8221;</p> <p>Their first recommendation was to &#8220;&#8230;put in place more effective age verification [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US Federal Trade Commission recently released a  report about how online/virtual &#8216;worlds&#8217; protect underage children from  harmful or explicit images. They investigated the mechanisms these  companies put in place to ensure that children 13 and under did not  access &#8220;things they shouldn&#8217;t.&#8221;</p>
<p>Their first recommendation was to &#8220;&#8230;put in place more effective age  verification methodology.&#8221;  Well, holy shit! They cracked it! It angers  me when an agency, government or not, comes up with a recommendation  that is as useful as, &#8220;My plan is to come up with a plan.&#8221; A 2-year-old  could have figured out that the reason why they can log into adult  online &#8216;worlds&#8217; is because there is no mechanism to prevent them!</p>
<p>But what is the solution? The fact of the matter is <em>there is none</em>. Just  as 16-year-olds can use their sibling&#8217;s ID to get into a bar illegally,  condoms are not 100% effective, and people continue to inexplicably love  Two and Half Men, there is no protection that can successfully  eliminate an intentional desire to do &#8220;things they shouldn&#8217;t,&#8221; except  blocking out the potential <em>altogether</em>. In this example, that would  include shutting down all bars, not having sex, and killing Charlie  Sheen. Alternately, there is the the always popular &#8216;lock yourself in an  opaque box&#8217;.</p>
<p>There are really two problems at play here, and neither have to do with  technology.</p>
<ol>
<li>Accidental access: While this kills my sex analogy because in my  research, accidental sex isn&#8217;t that easy&#8230; You can certainly  accidentally wander into a bar, a naughty website, or flick onto a tv  show that shouldn&#8217;t be on the air.</li>
<li>Purposeful circumvention:  You can purposely attempt to buy beer  underage, lie about your birth date on the web or in paperwork, and tune  into CBS.</li>
</ol>
<p>Before we go any further, we will <em>never </em>stop number 2. As I said above,  the FCC, FTC, FDA et. al. and their world wide equivalents can do all  they want and spend billions of currency units, but if someone wants to  do something and they can find a way, they will do it. Just as Philippe  Petit (&#8220;Man on Wire&#8221;, highly recommend watching), DB Cooper, the 9/11  perpetrators, etc., etc. proved: &#8220;You can do whatever you want.&#8221;  By the  way, does anyone else see the irony in that guidance councillors use  that phrase as a build up to young students, and then we spend  government money trying to figure out ways to prevent young students  from doing so?</p>
<p>Now in the accidental case the FTC found that even in &#8216;virtual worlds&#8217;  that were kid friendly, there were sexually explicit references,  violence, and other &#8220;things they shouldn&#8217;t&#8221; have access too. This is  nothing new, I mean go back and watch old cartoons, movies, read comic  books, or walk down any street in a major city. Now stop. The reason we  have to go back and re-watch the cartoons and movies, or re-read the  comic books is because in most cases we were too <em>innocent </em>to get the  joke. The reason why this next generation (who have been surfing for  porn since they could double click their index finger) is growing up so  fast is not because there are subtle references in their world to all of  this, it is because sex, violence, drugs and the like are promoted on a  daily basis to them as &#8216;bad&#8217;, and &#8216;bad&#8217; things are intriguing!  Remember?! Forget the sexually suggestive graphic in Sims online.  12-year-old girls see women in short skirts on tv or on the street and  then go and buy &#8220;Cosmo: The pedophile edition&#8221; to find out why, or the  8-year-old who knows in explicit detail what a blow job is because MTV  bleeps out mysterious words, so the curious mind has to go and find out  why! And to add to it all, today they have the capability find out quite  quickly, whereas when we were young we only had older siblings or &#8216;the  cool aunt&#8217;.</p>
<p>We played cops and robbers as kids and never even put together the fact  that this was violence personified.  Today they play cowboys and Indians  and are scolded because it is racist to portray Indians in that manner!</p>
<p>We try and protect kids against things they don&#8217;t understand, and they  therefore want to understand it, and at an age too young to comprehend  it. Instead of letting them hear the word &#8220;Fuck&#8221; and explaining that  society doesn&#8217;t want them to use that word (A-whole-nother blog entry  there), or letting them play with blissful ignorance without imparting  our adult morals, we attempt to hide what has always been in the open  and then wonder why they become more interested in it. Kids don&#8217;t need  our adult constructs forced upon them. While we need to monitor their  access to various things, whether it be bad TV or naughty websites, we  should do this in an effort to guide them morally, not force them to  learn adult life lessons at a younger and younger age.</p>
<p>PS: I hate Two and Half Men.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/protection-against-protection/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>My API</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/my-api</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/my-api#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 14:08:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[API]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=306</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>WARNING: Geeks only. (Persistent Link on the left hand side)</p> <p>I have been doing an excessive amount of coding lately, for both work and for personal things and I found that I use the same handful of JAVA methods in sequence to perform many tasks. Specifically around persisting/converting data.</p> <p>So in an effort to make [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WARNING: Geeks only. (<a title="Stoss' Util API" href="http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/my-api">Persistent Link</a> on the left hand side)</p>
<p>I have been doing an excessive amount of coding lately, for both work and for personal things and I found that I use the same handful of JAVA methods in sequence to perform many tasks. Specifically around persisting/converting data.</p>
<p>So in an effort to make my life easier I created a series of String and File utilities that I can call to avoid having to copy/paste and adjust dozens of lines of code.</p>
<p>The API is generic and mostly Object agnostic. I went through and fully documented all the methods, and I also overloaded many of the methods for the base case and specific cases.</p>
<p>I am posting it online here for people to use.:</p>
<ul>
<li><a title="Download the Stoss Utils API (JAR)" href="http://stoss.ca/API/files/util_api_1.0.jar">Java JAR</a></li>
<li><a title="Java Docs" href="http://www.stoss.ca/API/doc/index.html" target="_blank">JavaDocs</a></li>
<li><a title="Download the Stoss Util's API (DLL)" href="http://stoss.ca/API/files/util_api_1.0.dll">.NET DLL</a>*</li>
<li><a title="Download the Sample Java file" href="http://stoss.ca/API/sample/TestUtils.java">Sample Class</a></li>
</ul>
<p>I think eventually this will be &#8220;open source&#8221; in the sense I will let people add to it, but for the time being I&#8217;ll just see if anyone actually has an interest in it.</p>
<p>*Although not fully tested, There is a DLL version of this API. The DLL was generated using a neat little utility called <a title="IKVM" href="http://www.ikvm.net" target="_blank">IKVM</a>. The ability to convert JARs to DLLs is really useful!</p>
<p>You can run the Test Class by executing &#8220;java -jar util_api_1.0.jar&#8221;</p>
<p>This requires <a title="Java 6 Download" href="http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp" target="_blank">Java 6</a>.</p>
<p>Anyway, Please feel free to download and check out. Suggestions/Comments welcome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/my-api/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Fight Against Futility</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-fight-against-futility</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-fight-against-futility#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[survey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=290</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Recently the file sharing site Mininova decided to stop hosting any torrent that was not sent in from a registered user with rights to the material that was being posted. It was if a million file sharers suddenly screamed and then were silenced&#8230;</p> <p>With the fall of Napster, Supernova, Pirate Bay and now this I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently the file sharing site Mininova decided to stop hosting any torrent that was not sent in from a registered user with rights to the material that was being posted. It was if a million file sharers suddenly screamed and then were silenced&#8230;</p>
<p>With the fall of Napster, Supernova, Pirate Bay and now this I wonder the impact any of these widely publicized mini-victories has had?</p>
<p>The American &#8220;War on Drugs&#8221; was a late 60&#8242;s initiative and while various reports indicate drug use is down, an equal or greater number seem to report little change. Which isn&#8217;t surprising to me. If I ask any random yes or no question to any x number of people the result will likely vary from survey to survey.</p>
<p>It is impossible to determine the exact number of drug users for a variety of reasons. Avoiding the &#8220;since drugs being illegal, there is an apprehension about discussing their use&#8221; cliche, consider how I could go about calculating the number of smokers.</p>
<p>Obviously countries, and regions within those have different habits of smoking habits. If you broke down those regions based on something say like #of packs sold in a week, then determined the average number of cigarettes a smoker in that region smoked you could then calculate an estimate on the number of smokers in that region. Add all the regions up and (albeit with a fairly high margin of error), you could still get an idea of # of smokers..</p>
<p>There is no way to do this with illegal drugs in most of the western world. There is no idea how much of the product exists, and therefore no idea how much is sold and therefore no accurate measure of the use, or for that matter the change in use.</p>
<p>I am not arguing that the War on Drugs hasn&#8217;t worked, I am arguing that there is little they could do to prove it has and it has been going on since the 60s!</p>
<p>Assuming we know that for 40 years the government of the US (and many other countries) has put billions into fighting a war on something which we also know still exists and have no real way of measuring any affect, what does that mean in the case of Internet file sharing? Is the War on Pirated Music/Video identical to the War on Drugs?</p>
<p>Before every movie in the UK there is an ad with a famous person saying don&#8217;t copy this movie and there are plenty of celebrity anti-drug campaigns out there.  The agencies doing the fighting have just as much propaganda available see the little bit I did on <a href="http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/driving-me-to-drink" target="_blank">drug propaganda</a> previously and the RIAA&#8217;s wonderful news releases on their slowly being killed industry which set a new record for profits last year.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong, I am not indicating that because music and theatres are making money this legitimises  illegal actions, what I am simply putting forth is that fighting something that isn&#8217;t going to go away is like randomly waving your hand in the air with hopes it&#8217;ll hit and kill a fly.</p>
<p>It took 40 years to make an insignificant dent (if there is one at all) in drug use with &#8220;The War on Drugs&#8221; and its Most Wanted culprits are still in daily use. My bet is that the Internet landscape will change so vastly in the next 40 years that by the time the corporations fighting this massive swarm of file sharing website &#8220;flies&#8221; by waving lawsuit &#8220;flyswatters&#8221; randomly around the world the technology will have advanced far past today&#8217;s torrents and will become even more widespread.  Their method is too much like p<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">eeing in the Atlantic Ocean:  It isn&#8217;t going to change the pH level of the Pacific. </span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-fight-against-futility/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wave of the Future</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wave]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The beta of Google Wave has started, and I begged and grovelled for an invite and a friend was gracious enough to send one over. Here are my first thoughts.</p> <p>Google Wave will change virtual communication. It won&#8217;t be over night, and it won&#8217;t be accepted by all, but then again Facebook was founded in 2004 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-283" title="Google Wave" src="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/wave.jpg" alt="Google Wave" width="200" height="150" />The beta of Google Wave has started, and I begged and grovelled for an invite and a friend was gracious enough to send one over. Here are my first thoughts.</p>
<p>Google Wave <em>will </em>change virtual communication. It won&#8217;t be over night, and it won&#8217;t be accepted by all, but then again Facebook was founded in 2004 and didn&#8217;t take off until 2 years later and Twitter is just finding an audience after 3 years in obscurity.</p>
<p>Social Networking in the virtual world is an interesting beast. While Twitter still hasn&#8217;t found a model to make decent money, and websites that collate/sort/rate/track tweets are popping up everywhere trying to be the first to make financial gain off of Mr. Dorsey&#8217;s brainchild. Facebook went from a simple and usable interface to an ad-centric model where instead of putting your friends at the top put a series of sponsored ads, tailored for you by data mining your profile. How kind. The same can be said about MSN (sic) aka Windows Live Messenger.</p>
<p>Since the Web has grown into a marketer&#8217;s wet dream and consumers are demanding everything for free, there seems to be a skew on the supply and demand charts. Because of that it means the newest challenge is balancing ads and ad space alongside product. And this is where Google thrives. Whether we talk about their minimalistic search engine interface (which makes Yahoo&#8217;s and MSN&#8217;s webpages look like a a 3 year old&#8217;s finger painting from the 60&#8242;s) to the subtle scrolling ads in Gmail: Google has nailed the balance of making free products while still capitalizing on the lust of web marketers.</p>
<p>So what does all of this have to do with Wave changing the virtual communication landscape? Wave currently is a ad-less, persistent, collaborative, realtime, multimedia, open source communication tool. I am sure the lack of ads will end coincidentally at the same time as the beta program. But the rest of my adjectives are a huge distinction from what is currently available.</p>
<p>At the moment products such as WebEx and Net Meeting dominate in the web conferencing space right now. While desktop sharing is a must in our international business world, what these technologies lack is the collaborative nature of a meeting. These products allow one user to display their screens, &#8220;whiteboard&#8221; and allow a basic MSNesque like text chat. While Wave lacks the desktop sharing, the ability to, <em>in real time</em>, share links, sites, photos, and a variety of other &#8220;gadgets&#8221; (polls are quite interesting where people can vote on any question and the tallies are immediately updated). How would this affect taking meeting notes, minutes etc? Every try to take a poll in a group chat room or over a conference call? Think about group projects in a university setting and how much easier it would be to all make decisions from the comfort of your home, in a &#8220;secure&#8221; (more notes on this later) and 100% traceable, copyable, printable way? No more will you argue over who said they&#8217;d print off the report.</p>
<p>Multimedia is a huge plus. How nice is it that you can add a gadget that shows a direct map to your place while you are &#8220;chatting&#8221; about directions to your place. No more need to lose a link in an accidentally closed MSN window, or having a subject less email with a static screenshot attached.  And the small fact that it uses rich text. Now you can give your thoughts headings and highlight important words. Now when you copy and paste from one medium to another you won&#8217; t get stupid bats flying in your post, or lose the spacing/formatting so you have alphabet soup on your screen. In the end this provides a clearer message to the people you are communicating with.(Did I mention inline spell checking?)</p>
<p>Persistence. This is a huge problem with the web in general. Say goodbye to losing a lengthy Facebook message after accidentally clicking &#8220;back&#8221; or closing your browser. Wave stores your details <em>in realtime</em>. If you hit the k button, not only does everyone see that you hit that button, but you can immediately close your browser without any &#8220;save&#8221; keystroke and it persists. Add to that that you can file your sessions, re-open, re-play or continue them at any time and this is the most persistent capability the web offers today. Another key to all of this is that you don&#8217;t have random MSN-style .rtf files saved all over your harddrive with cryptic names like &#8220;chat with John&#8221; or &#8220;sweet cyber sex&#8221;.</p>
<p>Another feature is the concept of &#8220;Public Waves&#8221;. This is(*ahem* will be) the ultimate combination of mIRC, Internet forums, Message boards, CraigsList and knowledge bases. Combine the entire global community speaking on any subject in a realtime fashion with the search and storage capabilities of Google. It&#8217;ll put Yahoo Questions to shame.</p>
<p>And finally on my &#8220;pro&#8217;s&#8221; list, open source.  Once the hardcore geeks get a hold of this (I&#8217;ve already read that the race for the first usable iPhone and Blackberry apps is on) the possibilities are endless. Put on an MSN skin that minimizes the product into a compact chat forum for just you and your friends, build it into a WebEx-like technology to combine realtime knowledge and data share with PowerPoint and desktop presentations. An infinite communication market has just been opened up!</p>
<p>Of course with any great technology comes the bad.  At the moment security is a huge concern. Notwithstanding the recent Google problems with security; Are corporations going to trust their internal data to Google.  I don&#8217;t know the answer to this question. But in the open source world, I am sure that someone can develop quite quickly a security model that addresses the concerns that will undoubtedly arise.</p>
<p>The current interface is clunky and unintuitive and forces you (practically) to be in a full screen mode. This isn&#8217;t useful for most of us in our multitasking culture. Again, open source to the rescue.</p>
<p>The tracking issue. Google is renowned, and routinely chastised, for gathering data. And while I still agree that tracking my searches is a help to me, is tracking every personal/professional conversation I have necessary? I haven&#8217;t read a lot on this topic yet, I hope to shortly, but I have to assume some level of data mining is occurring.  What will this do to corporate use? It would be a stumbling block I am sure for this technology to take off on that front. For the public market? Well, 300 million people use Facebook and that site is entirely about mining data.</p>
<p>WebEx and Net Meeting are bloated and for no good reason. They require downloads and constant updates and still tend to be prone to errors outside of the IE world. Wave has none of these problems. The slickness of Google has yet again struck.</p>
<p>All in all, I 100% agree with Google&#8217;s marketing of this technology that Google Wave is what &#8220;e-mail&#8221; would have been if it was invented from scratch, and not made to mimic the existing postal system we had world wide.It took almost 3 years for Gmail to open to the general public and now it boasts 150 million users, both corporate and personal. I am very excited for the next 3 years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trick or Hack!</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/trick-or-hack</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/trick-or-hack#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hackers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=276</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the recent news of the e-mail phishing scam on Gmail, Yahoo! and Hotmail (and presumably others) my blood has been absolutely boiling over the horribly inaccurate, sensationalistic comments that are being published in all sorts of reputable newpapers!</p> <p>First lets be clear:  These guys are NOT hackers. They are not. At very best they [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the <a title="Google targeted in e-mail scam" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8292928.stm" target="_blank">recent news</a> of the e-mail phishing scam on Gmail, Yahoo! and Hotmail (and presumably others) my blood has been absolutely boiling over the horribly inaccurate, sensationalistic comments that are being published in all sorts of reputable newpapers!</p>
<p>First lets be clear:  These guys are NOT hackers. They are not. At very best they are clever people who realized that you can get people that are less clever to tell you things they shouldn&#8217;t. This is not new to e-mail, Facebook, corporate logins&#8230; In fact people take advantage of less clever people all the time. 3card monte in some form has existed for centuries and continues to fool people! Yesterday and today a <a title="Amber Alert in Oshawa WI: Fake Alert Spreads Via Twitter &amp; SMS" href="http://www.nowpublic.com/tech-biz/amber-alert-oshawa-wi-fake-alert-spreads-twitter-sms" target="_blank">fake Amber Alert message</a> has been circulating the web, thousands have been fooled into propagating a false message. Tricking people is not the same as hacking. <a title="mafiaboy" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MafiaBoy" target="_blank">mafiaboy </a>is a hacker. <a title="kevin Mitnik" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mitnick" target="_blank">Kevin Mitnik</a> was a hacker (although he was never malicious and wrongfully imprisoned).</p>
<p>The people who did this have done nothing wrong (I assume the lawyers for the above companies will disagree)&#8230; They asked for people&#8217;s passwords and the people gave them to them, I can do that right now: Please send me your passwords&#8230; In fact post them directly below this entry so that everyone can see them&#8230;. Sure they set up a fancy phishing site and sure they claimed to be someone they aren&#8217;t, but that is immoral, not malicious. Now, the people that <em>use </em>those passwords for malicious purposes are the ones breaking the law. Just as it is illegal for me to open your (snail) mail. (and yes, I concede these people could be one and the same, but it is important to distinguish that, which the media is not)</p>
<p>The problem, and I know I have beaten this to death, is that people seem to think technology is something <em>new</em>, and it isn&#8217;t. It is an <em>adaptation </em>of something. All technology is is an advancement of a previous incarnation of something else. Cell phones are an advancement of cordless phones, which are an advancement from corded phones, where were an enhancement on dial phones, which were an advancement on  the original switchhook phones, and the cycle goes back to the first person to every tie a string between two cups. The concept and basic requirement is the same in all of these cases: I have information and I want to share it with someone who isn&#8217;t within sound wave receiving distance of my voice.</p>
<p>And finally, the calls for &#8220;increased security&#8221; and &#8220;more education&#8221; at these companies is absolutely preposterous.  There is <strong>NO</strong> level of security or education that can prevent a person divulging personal information. How hard is it to understand &#8220;Don&#8217;t tell people your password.&#8221;? And yes, these guys used a sophisticated website to garner this information, but how is Google to prevent people from writing a webpage that looks like theirs? I mean I could mock up a Gmail page and have it be identical to it. How do you teach the mass public to make sure the website they are typing personal data into is legit? Well forward this Blog URL to 15 people and you will find out, because if you don&#8217;t you will have bad sex for the rest of your life! I mean after dozens of friends sending me hundreds of those  over the past 10 years I am sure they all learned that that is a scam&#8230;</p>
<p>Contrary to popular belief, people do not learn from their mistakes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/trick-or-hack/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top One Reason People Hate Technology</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/top-one-reason-people-hate-technology</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/top-one-reason-people-hate-technology#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:44:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I hate &#8220;Top&#8221; lists. I do. All of them. I&#8217;ve hated them since before Letterman tried to make them his own, and I hate them even more now when webpages take 10 links to show 10 pictures of the top 10 potentially homophobic animated characters as judged by someone with the television knowledge of my [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate &#8220;Top&#8221; lists. I do. All of them. I&#8217;ve hated them since before Letterman tried to make them his own, and I hate them even more now when webpages take 10 links to show 10 pictures of the top 10 potentially homophobic animated characters as judged by someone with the television knowledge of my left ass cheek.</p>
<p>But here is a list that I cannot even begin to tell you how much I hate. <a href="http://www.spike.com/blog/top-7-ways/84197?spike=6503" target="_blank">The Top Seven Ways Technology Owns You</a>. For those of you who don&#8217;t want to (or can&#8217;t) read:</p>
<ul>
<li>OnStar cars</li>
<li>Google&#8217;s data mining</li>
<li>Facebook and other social networking sites</li>
<li>Digital Cameras being used in public</li>
<li>Credit Card data mining to determine your risk as a card holder</li>
<li>CCTV</li>
<li>RFID Tags</li>
</ul>
<div>OK, where to start&#8230;</div>
<div><strong>OnStar</strong>: OnStar uses is the combination of 2 major technologies. One is a similar system to the black box on a airplane. This technology in cars has been around since 1970! It tracks data on crashes and is used to make cars safer for the general public and can be used in court to show dangerous driving. The second is GPS. Now, although this become operational globally in the 90&#8242;s, similar technologies have been around since the 40&#8242;s and were widely used in WWII. Having cars speeds controlled by these technologies is not scary, in fact it is probably the best method of accident prevention. Several years ago they started demo&#8217;ing Magnetic cars in California where there was no need to accelerate or drive. Speeds were controlled by magnets in the roads and a computer system. Cars could drive 70 mph within 5 feet of each other without any human error causing accidents&#8230; computer error, well, that is for another entry <img src='http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  Oh and BTW, don&#8217;t you have to voluntarily buy OnStar?</div>
<div></div>
<div><strong>Data mining (Facebook, Google, Credit Card)</strong>: I wrote on this <a href="http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-conclusion-to-a-discussion-on-social-networking" target="_blank">before</a>, but I will re-iterate. Credit Cards companies are just that: Companies. They are in business for the bottom line. In the same vain as Health Insurance companies charging more to people with heart disease in their family and car insurance companies charging more for 17 year old males, they have every right to determine your risk to their bottom line and the bonus to them is, you can&#8217;t lie like you could on a physical, every purchase tells a story about you. One thing the article did teach me though is to stop paying for lapdances on my Visa. Now, Google and Facebook are very similar in this regard. You tell them something about yourself and they use it to their advantage.  Write or wrong, that is the agreement you make by using their services. There are 100&#8242;s of search engines, don&#8217;t like it, use one who cares less about who you are&#8230; The one example I am <em>tired</em> of hearing about is this (which seems to be in every tech article I read) &#8220;<em>Facebook changed their terms of service and essentially gave themselves the ability to do anything they wanted with user’s data and content whenever they felt like it, the community freaked out.</em>&#8221; THIS IS PROPOGANDA! Facebook wasn&#8217;t trying to steal your data, they were trying to protect themselves like any company who holds sensitive information. The term actually was put in place because: If I send a picture or a message to you there are now two copies of that item: mine in my outbox and yours in your inbox. Now if I cancel my account they can simply delete my copy, but who &#8220;owns&#8221; the other copy? If you sent a Christmas gift to your girlfriend and then broke up, just try getting it back! In exactly the same manner Zuckerberg said that they need to keep control of that item, because now that you are gone you certainly aren&#8217;t the rightful owner. Admittedly, they could have gone about this in a better way, but regardless, they were <em>not</em> giving themselves the rights to all data!</div>
<div></div>
<div><strong>Digital Cameras and CCTV</strong>: The argument here is that because everything from cellphones to pens have cameras in them, you can be recorded at any moment and placed on YouTube for millions to see. Fair enough. I myself don&#8217;t see the necessity of a camera built into every object. But is it really changing our lives? Do you walk around constantly thinking that you better not take a peak at that hot chick&#8217;s ass for fear of being caught on a total stranger&#8217;s camera? I am the first to admit this is a small small world, but I am not about to start panicking that I will be caught with my pants down by someone that happens to snap a picture at that exact moment and by some miracle that picture will be seen by someone I know. The biggest load of bullshit on this list is CCTV. This is the most useless technology ever concieved (at least in its current form). I don&#8217;t care that I am on camera nearly my entire day, because a) no one is watching and b) even if they were they couldn&#8217;t tell it was me! There is no magic CSI &#8220;enhance&#8221; button that turns %^#$%&amp; scribbled on a gum wrapper in the backseat of my car into &#8220;I shot JR&#8221; and lands me in jail.</div>
<div></div>
<div><strong>RFID Tags</strong>: I left this for the end for no other reason than it is my most simplistic and unelaborate argument. RFID tags are not going to take over humanity. They aren&#8217;t. It is a fantastic technology that can be used in numerous industries and in many fashions, but assimilating humanity into having all ID inserted under the skin is not going to happen overnight. AND even if it does, this is not a way for the governement to track our every move. The range of an RFID tag is less than 10m, so unless the gov&#8217;t wants to invest in more monitors than human beings, our every move isn&#8217;t going to be tracked! The passport argument doesn&#8217;t even hold either. If anything this will speed up airport times, and give border guards the exact same information they <em>already</em> have! Doesn&#8217;t sound like an apocalyptic move to me.</div>
<div></div>
<div>It is &#8220;Top&#8221; lists like this that promote the ignorance and fear mongering that sweeps through and takes over rational people&#8217;s minds. And this is the Top One reason why people hate technology: Dipshit reporters writing fake stories about exagerated technological capabilities with the underlying message being &#8220;EVERYBODY PANIC!&#8221; I myself will live my life, own a camera, use Google and Facebook, charge stuff on credit card, walk around in any major city surrounded by CCTV. I suggest you do too.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/top-one-reason-people-hate-technology/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What a Hack</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/what-a-hack</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/what-a-hack#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:16:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=215</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>It was recently announced that 1 month ago perennial Stoss Blog antagonist Twitter had a security breach when a high ranking executive&#8217;s account was accessed by a &#8220;hacker&#8221;. The hacker correctly guessed the users&#8217;s secret security questions to gain access to the account then surfed through corporate data and released it to well known techie [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was recently announced that 1 month ago perennial Stoss Blog antagonist Twitter had a <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/google/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218500810">security breach</a> when a high ranking executive&#8217;s account was accessed by a &#8220;hacker&#8221;. The hacker correctly guessed the users&#8217;s secret security questions to gain access to the account then surfed through corporate data and released it to well known techie sites. As the hacker himself posted: He did this to make people aware of the importance of security.</p>
<p>The articles I have read have used this as an excuse to bash the practice of &#8220;1 password for all sites&#8221; and the use of easily guessed security questions like &#8220;hometown&#8221; or &#8220;mother&#8217;s maiden name&#8221; which are ubiquitous it seems in the land of web sign up sheets. It&#8217;s almost as if some assmonkey whose only knowledge of security was the aluminum key that locked his pansy-ass diary decided one day it would be great if we could secure our most personal data using such totally secret, impossible-to-find-out data such as our pet&#8217;s name or the street we live on! Yeah, no one would be able to penetrate that code!</p>
<p>But I don&#8217;t so much have a beef with this. It&#8217;s security practices in general, both corporately and personally that are appalling! We focus so much energy on enforcing ridiculous rules that are absolutely unsubstantiated and yet no energy on the flaws in the human logic of password selection.</p>
<p>Here are the fallacy&#8217;s behind my favourite policies:</p>
<p>1) Change your password every 3 months &amp; don&#8217;t use the same password for 10 changes</p>
<p>The genius that came up with this should be shot in the chest simply because it is now become the most ridiculous belief since the Hayley&#8217;s comet morons killed themselves to ride it to utopia. Would you change the lock on your house or your car doors every 3 months? Hell! Most people don&#8217;t change them when they move or sell their car! How many previous owners have a key to your house do you think? I have never figured out the logic behind this absolute waste of time policy that does about as much good as putting duct tape over your monitor to stop UV radiation. If someone finds out your password, they aren&#8217;t going to wait for 3 months then go, &#8220;drat, foiled again!&#8221; when it fails. It only takes a few minutes to download the entire contents of your harddrive, so by the logic of preventing data theft we should change our password every 5 minutes, right? If anything this <em>helps</em> hackers, because people are <em>not</em> random! We get lazy and append a number or capitalize a different letter to form our new password, so a hacker can guess for months on end and, once he has &#8220;your pattern&#8221;, will perpetually have access to your account. And this is the reason why not using the same password for 10 changes makes no sense! If anything this <em>encourages </em>using mypassword0 through mypassword9.<br />
I also love the idea of &#8220;3 months&#8221; and &#8220;10 changes&#8221; seemingly being industry standards. What possible study could have resulted in these numbers being determined as the &#8220;optimal&#8221; values?<br />
I love policies that seem picked out of a hat and then spoken about like they are a gospel to the industry. As if 91 days is a magic number for a criminal to guess your password, so better change it before day 90!</p>
<p>2) Password strength monitors and post-its</p>
<p>&#8220;Don&#8217;t tell anyone your PIN&#8221;, &#8220;Never write down your password&#8221;, &#8220;We will never ask for your password in an email&#8221;. BUT what we will do is analyze every character and tell you if your password is &#8220;strong&#8221; enough. Strong enough for what? To knock out Superman? To cut a diamond? We are talking about basic mathematics here. A password of length 5 made up of all small letter only has about 12 million combinations, throw in one capital and it is about 60 million combinations. Throw in a number somewhere on top of that and you are now at 3.5 billion combinations! That is a pretty big number. But consider most companies/websites have a 3 wrong and you&#8217;re out policy (A policy that <em>does</em> make sense), that is a hell of a lot of attempts on your password and if you can&#8217;t figure out after the ten thousandth time your account was locked that someone was hacking you than you deserve to be shot like the guy who proposed the stupid policy above.<br />
The thing here is that the combination of letters, number, capitals and special characters is almost irrelevant, the most secure password is random, entirely random. I am still using a random letter combination I got generated for me by Geocities when I had my first webpage over 12 years ago. Sure, mathmatically it is probably trivial for a random generator to exhaustively guess it, most personal computers can do 1 billion+ calculations a second. But the point is it ain&#8217;t that likely! Just don&#8217;t use a simple dictionary word like &#8220;idiot&#8221; or &#8220;password&#8221; and you are probably in good shape.<br />
I also love how secure it is that we are typing in a password that no one is supposed to know, but it can tell you &#8220;how strong&#8221; it is, meaning somewhere your password characters are analyzed. How is that different than me saying &#8220;psst, tell me your password 1 character at a time and I&#8217;ll tell you if you need more numbers or capitals, but don&#8217;t worry, my mind will forget it immediately&#8221;.<br />
And of course this is where post its come in. The problem is not writing your password down, it is writing it down in the context of your computer and login. For instance:<br />
Stupid: Writing your password in permanent ink on your monitor<br />
Bad: Writing your password down and placing it in the top right drawer at the office<br />
Less Bad: Writing it on the birthday square of your mother in a day planner you keep with you that has no reference to what that random word could mean or what login is associated with it.<br />
Even better. Hiding it in a tattoo on your ass, written backwards and upside down. Of course you&#8217;d have 10 of them and have to re-design it every 3 months&#8230;.<br />
Writing a random word and placing it in a random location is not a bad idea at all! In fact if anything it&#8217;s a safeguard in case someone needs access to your data!</p>
<p>Locking all of your secrets behind a single alphanumeric combination is as logical as locking a door to a convertable or keeping your safe key hanging on the number dial. However in this day of technology we have to have something to allow us secured access to our information, and until we all scan our eyes, fingers and ass prints into a global database or want to prick our finger for DNA each time we want to read email, we are stuck with it. Be smart and just don&#8217;t fall into the trap and think that your security policies actually have as much bearing on security as they do on wasting your time. Oh and I know your mother&#8217;s maiden name and eye colour, so don&#8217;t use those as your &#8220;secret&#8221; questions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/what-a-hack/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pics For Thought</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/pics-for-thought</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/pics-for-thought#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 18:41:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[random]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=179</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A few more day-to-day pictures:</p> <p><p class="wp-caption-text">Enjoying it while I can</p> The above comic was sent to me after my blog posts on Mr. Keen&#8217;s book about Internet media destroying society. The big-nosed guy on the right makes an interesting point, there will always be a need for writers no matter where we read our [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few more day-to-day pictures:</p>
<table style="height: 806px;" border="0" width="575">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2">
<p><div id="attachment_180" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/lnq090504.gif"><img class="size-medium wp-image-180" title="Enjoying it while I can" src="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/lnq090504-300x97.gif" alt="Enjoying it while I can" width="300" height="97" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Enjoying it while I can</p></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2">The above comic was sent to me after my blog posts on Mr. Keen&#8217;s book about Internet media destroying society. The big-nosed guy on the right makes an interesting point, there will always be a need for writers no matter where we read our news.</p>
<p>Interestingly enough, does anyone else notice the bomb on the hippy on th left&#8217;s computer? I am not sure if this is a subtle addition by the author that all Internt news readers are terrorists, or if it just a poorly drawn apple. I am hoping it is the later, otherwise I&#8217;ll have to learn how to handle anthrax.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p><div id="attachment_181" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 236px"><a href="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img00029-20090517-1509.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-181" title="A polite indicator" src="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img00029-20090517-1509-300x225.jpg" alt="A polite indicator" width="226" height="169" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">A polite indicator</p></div></td>
<td valign="top">I want to thank the construction company for politely letting me know that if I am planning an emergency, that there is a spot ahead for me to stop and attend to that emergency.</p>
<p>By definition isn&#8217;t an emergency something that is unplanned or unforeseen? For instance if the car I was in when I took this picture caught on fire, do you really think I would think to myself &#8220;Well, shit&#8230; I am not near an official emergency stopping area, guess I&#8217;ll keep on plugging forward?&#8221;</p>
<p>Aside from the stupidity of this sign, I wonder how much this sign cost tax payers? I would also love to see statistics on how many people actually use these official stopping areas. Why does no one seem to realize when doing construction budgets how much of a waste things like this are?</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s from now on spend money on paying the workers to get the work done faster so that &#8220;construction season&#8221; doesn&#8217;t run into winter.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">This was a laminated pamphlet sitting on the table of a Toronto restaurant I was eating at. Making a leap I am assuming this was advertising something grown locally. I am not aware of what that plant is, but this was a pamphlet for wine and I am pretty positive this is not a grape vine or a wine barrel. Also I am kinda sure that ripping a plant out, roots and all, from the ground is not a sound gardening practice.</p>
<p>What gets me is: Who would think that this graphic a) indicates wine b) makes me want to purchase wine or c) tricks people into thinking that Toronto has dirt and plants?</p>
<p>I did not take any marketing classes, but based on my knowledge of print and tv ads the only appropriate place for dirt as a marketing device is for washing detergent, and even then only if you are advertising how it whitens, not how it protects colours. For the later you would want bright clothes that have been washed 100s of times indicated as a caption on your ad.</p>
<p>I did not have wine with this meal.</td>
<td valign="top">
<p><div id="attachment_182" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 252px"><a href="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/locally.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-182" title="Dirt, an interesting sales strategy" src="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/locally-300x225.jpg" alt="Dirt, and interesting sales strategy" width="242" height="181" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Dirt, an interesting sales strategy</p></div></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/pics-for-thought/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>www dot withdrawl dot com</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/www-dot-withdrawl-dot-com</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/www-dot-withdrawl-dot-com#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 20:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The other night I came home to no Internet. It appeared I could not get an IP address from my ISP. (un-geekly written: Internet had a booboo). I wanted to call the provider to tell them I was down, to make sure they were investigating, however I realized to do this I needed access to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other night I came home to no Internet. It appeared I could not get an IP address from my ISP. (un-geekly written: Internet had a booboo). I wanted to call the provider to tell them I was down, to make sure they were investigating, however I realized to do this I needed access to their website where their phone numbers were&#8230;</p>
<p>I was going to call my parents to catch up with them, but my VoIP phone needs Internet&#8230;</p>
<p>I wanted to write this blog entry, but&#8230; etc.</p>
<p>We are surrounded by Internet so much these days, that it is seemingly becoming almost a necessity of life. I tried calling an embassy the other day for information and their telephone line directed me to the website that contained the phone number I used to call them; <em>very helpful</em>.</p>
<p>While 84% of households in Canada and 74% in the USA had Internet in 2008, that is still beat by 90% of Iceland and 86% of Norway (like there is anything else to do in those countries anyway).</p>
<p>What else on this planet is as ubiquitous as the Internet? What else reaches so many generations and so many business verticals? Maybe driving? It is estimated that under 200 million Americans drive, so what&#8217;s that, 60%? That comes close. But then again, I have driven only a dozen times in 3 years. Which would you rather go without your car or your Internet?</p>
<p>With the web becoming more and more mobile, being connected is not only becoming easier, but it is becoming more inescapable. A new technology called <a href="http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Dec2008/First_MiFi_Intelligent_Mobile_Hotspot_3G.htm">MiFi</a> is being advertised now in the USA. BUY THIS STOCK! This technology will be wanted by anyone who travels anywhere, ever! But this just goes to show how much we crave the Internet. We now have what is essentially a portable router to carry around so we never have to be disconnected anywhere a cellphone works, which these days is pretty much everywhere, except maybe anywhere North of Toronto or West of Thunder Bay. <img src='http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>The CEO of Google recently gave a speech to a group of University graduates where he told them to <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hk2_X3Te8xchIOsJ49yZovHTRzvgD988S7900">turn off their computers</a>! And how rightfully so, except 5 years from now he&#8217;ll have to amend his statement to &#8220;Turn off your cellphones, toasters, coffee mugs, and iEngagementRings&#8221; in order for people to truly be disconnected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/www-dot-withdrawl-dot-com/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Significant Insignificances</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/significant-insignificances</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/significant-insignificances#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>What do a typewriter and Germany have to do with Twitter?</p> <p>In fact quite a bit, but let&#8217;s step back for a second. How many times have you felt like you were wasting time? Seemed like you were doing something insignificant? Your actions have no relevance to your future goals?</p> <p>In this season on &#8220;How [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do a typewriter and Germany have to do with Twitter?</p>
<p>In fact quite a bit, but let&#8217;s step back for a second. How many times have you felt like you were wasting time? Seemed like you were doing something insignificant? Your actions have no relevance to your future goals?</p>
<p>In this season on &#8220;How I Met Your Mother&#8221; there have been a few reflections of this sort. For instance &#8220;What would have happened had I taken that cab?&#8221; or &#8220;What would have changed had I not been on that street corner at that time?&#8221;.  The point that these statements make is quite simply that life is not a series of achievements or milestones, it is a series of interlocked microseconds where the affect of the previous billions and trillions are placed on the next infinitesimal.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t believe me? Think about something fairly significant in your life. Today is my 4th anniversary with the company I work for. But how did I ever get this job? I heard about my company through a guest speaker in a course at UoG, i was introduced by the professor who I had known from a previous course, I only took that previous course because I had a choice of 2 electives and I had several friends in that course, I had made those friends from living in South Residence. In theory I could even pull this back farther as to why did I chose UoG, or Computer Science for that matter and that takes me back until the age of about 12, probably further. So an action that at the time may have been considered insignificant has resulted in me working for a company where I travel the world, get paid to do something I enjoy and work with a fantastic group of people. Some may say I am stretching it, but am I?</p>
<p>About 3 winters ago I had taken a day off of work to do some errands, Christmas shopping, and a few things for the fam. I woke up a little later than normal and went to have breakfast, out of milk for cereal I made eggs. i showered dressed and went down to my car. I got all the way down to my car and realized I forgot my phone, so I went back up. As I came out of my parking lot, as I was used to doing for work I turned left. About a city block went by before I realized I should have turned right, I started looking for a place to turn around when a police officer pulled in behind me and politely gave me a speeding ticket. Other than the obvious fact that the real blame is on me speeding&#8230;  Can I blame the meeting of me and this officer on me taking the longer time to make eggs than a simple bowl of cereal? The reason the milk was empty escapes me now, as at the time it was an insignificant detail. What about forgetting my cellphone? That added time to my delay? Couldn&#8217;t my vacation day have been on a different day?  <em>Why was I at that intersection at that time on that day?<br />
</em></p>
<p>Twitter was limited to 140 characters for the highly publicized reason that SMS Text messaging standards is 160 characters, and Twitter allows 20 letters for a username. But why are text messages 160 characters? In the mid 80s a communications researcher working on a project to replace the pager sat at a typewriter and typed several common sentences he would have used his new gadget for. He found that almost all those sentences where less than 160 characters. He deemed that sufficient. When cellphones adopted this, bandwidth was slow and very tight, so they stuck with this to reduce overhead, and now that bandwidth is relatively cheap and plentiful we still use a non-scientific 80s limitation in a highly capable technology.</p>
<p>So when professors say that that the text message is ruining the way kids speak, perhaps we should blame that German researcher and his typewriter? Or we should blame the guy who hired him to research, or perhaps we should blame some other seemingly insignificant action that happened well before the 80s?</p>
<p>The problem is that this is all hindsight, who could know that me being stranded in a pub one evening would lead to me befriending a person who 2 years later is taking a trip with me to India? Who knew that by casually mentioning to my former boss I like to travel it would result in a series of events that moved me to England for 2.5+ years and counting?</p>
<p>I can think of so many examples in my life.  Most I cannot even trace back because the moments were so fleeting, but realizing this just gives another reason why you need to go with the flow of life, don&#8217;t try and control everything, don&#8217;t fret about spilling a coffee or tripping on a sidewalk because who knows: That action may lead you closer to your dreams.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/significant-insignificances/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Conclusion to a Discussion on Social Networking</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-conclusion-to-a-discussion-on-social-networking</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-conclusion-to-a-discussion-on-social-networking#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2009 14:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I could spend a lot of time reviewing each absurdity of this book, but alas I like to branch out more. Instead I think in my final reflection I&#8217;ll finish with why I believe Mr. Keen has this sense of reality that I do not share.</p> <p>Since I stated posting blog entries I have received [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I could spend a lot of time reviewing each absurdity of this book, but alas I like to branch out more. Instead I think in my final reflection I&#8217;ll finish with why I believe Mr. Keen has this sense of reality that I do not share.</p>
<p>Since I stated posting blog entries I have received many comments such as &#8220;Stoss, you really think about the world in a fucked up way.&#8221; And I agree. I tend to think about things differently. I am not near arrogant enough to think my opinion is the only one, or necessarily correct. To paraphrase a quote from The Truman Show <sub>(highly under-rated movie)</sub>: &#8220;We all live in the reality with which we are presented.&#8221;</p>
<p>About 3 months ago I went on a date with a smart, pretty, 20-something professional in the bio-medical field who lives by herself away from her family. On the surface you might think we are very similar. We are both white-collar workers, we are independent, well traveled and have the means to sustain ourselves. The topic came up as to how often we order take away. I said not that often, usually just Friday night curry or something. She gasped! &#8220;Once a week?! That is really often!&#8221;</p>
<p>At the time we had a quick laugh and moved on, but the above story is directly related to this book. I live in a reality where once a week takeout is not only normal, it is considered infrequent. That being said, lately I also live in a world where if I am not on 4 or 6 airplanes in a month I consider it &#8220;downtime&#8221;.</p>
<p>The point I am trying to make is that in Mr. Keen&#8217;s reality the Internet is the culprit for the downfall of society. I am sure he truly believes that and I wouldn&#8217;t fault him on it. In my reality the Internet is one of, if not the most important technological advances ever and has potential to propel society in directions we cannot even fathom yet.</p>
<p>The later part of the book has a couple themes. One is human behaviour and the other is the disadvantages to an all electronic society.</p>
<p>Keen blames sex addiction on the vast amount of porn on the Internet. Sex addiction? The only purpose for us to exist is for sex. Monogamy, humility, these are man-made concepts. Sex addiction is fundamental to our existence. The fact birth control, condoms, abortion were invented just helps us to not over-populate the shit out of this planet. Just think, if they diverted the attention give to the industry of preventing pregnancy to a field like cancer, how would this world be different?</p>
<p>Our realities did meet in a few way though. Keen talks about the information gathering on the net and the potentially disastrous effects it could have if it leaks. I agree. I find it very spooky when I log into Facebook in Germany and my ads are in German, or when I land in type in www.google.com in Switzerland and get directed to www.google.ch.</p>
<p>What if every search, every online purchase and every website you ever visited was somehow displayed to the world? Would you be embarrassed? Would losing the expected anonymity of the Internet be detrimental to your life?</p>
<p>Now the big brother view is that the Information Superhighway has CCTV cameras at every metre to watch you, track you and record your every move. The truth is that this is nothing new. Credit card companies have been data mining your information for decades to find patterns and anomalies to help them prevent credit card fraud. For the most part these measures are there to help you. It lets Google know when you search for Mustang, do you mean horse or car. It lets Amazon recommend books to you to save you searching or when you are stuck for a choice. But as I discussed earlier, all technologies have the ability to be used for nefarious purposes.</p>
<p>How is it different that you have a subscription to a gardening magazine and that magazine sells your address to gardening supply stores so they can send you mail, than Facebook putting up a &#8220;singles in the UK&#8221; ad on my page because I am listed as single and living in the UK?</p>
<p>The ironic part of all of this discussion is that at the end of bashing amateurs, saying that we can have no idea when someone isn&#8217;t a paid professional on a subject if they are telling the truth or lying, the author admits in the final pages of his book that he himself is an amateur, that this is first book and he had to rely on several others in writing it. Think about that for a bit.</p>
<p>Mr. Keen clearly sees the Internet as something vastly different than any previous technology. I do not. I see it as an advancement, sort of like VHS-&gt;DVD-&gt;Blue Ray.  If Keen took the time to think about this in the grand scheme of our society and not in the individual case studies (The Internet poker player who robs a bank to pay off his debt, or the German teenagers who faked a political message on YouTube etc) he would see we are no worse off at all. We have just transitioned to a new form of culture, economy and values, not destroyed them at all.</p>
<p>Bottom line: I am glad I read this book. I hated it page after page, but sometimes it takes something that you hate for you to reflect on why you like something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-conclusion-to-a-discussion-on-social-networking/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Continuing Social Networking Discussion (part 2)</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-continuing-social-networking-discussion-part-2</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-continuing-social-networking-discussion-part-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ideas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Success]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=136</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Chapter 3 &#8211; 5:</p> <p>We join the book with a new hypothesis from Mr Keen. Because some people lie on the Internet, we cannot be sure if anything is truth and therefore it is all invalid.  Solid idea. Applying this to elsewhere in the world: Because airplanes crash no one should fly, because some people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Chapter 3 &#8211; 5</span>:</p>
<p>We join the book with a new hypothesis from Mr Keen. Because some people lie on the Internet, we cannot be sure if anything is truth and therefore it is all invalid.  Solid idea. Applying this to elsewhere in the world: Because airplanes crash no one should fly, because some people kill people all people kill people&#8230;</p>
<p>It is also the start of what appears to be this author&#8217;s favourite way to make a point&#8230; putting several questions in a row at the end of a paragraph to make you &#8220;think&#8221; about his ideas, as opposed to proving his ideas.</p>
<p>Does anyone remember Bree or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonelygirl15">lonleygirl15 </a>as she was known on the web? He uses this interesting example of a new type of entertainment as an example that: &#8220;We&#8217;re never sure if what we read or see is what it seems&#8221;. Is a videoblog of a 16 year old girl who turned out to be an 18 year old actress really the best example of falsehood that we can find? How about the current Swine Flu &#8220;epidemic&#8221;, in 1st world countries no one has even died from this &#8220;epidemic&#8221;, in fact the only deaths have been in Mexico and of the 150 <em>possible cases</em>, only 20 swine flu deaths have even been confirmed! But wait! The fact we are in an epidemic and should be panicking all across the world is something paid, non-amateur writers are discussing, guess I better go by my $0.02 face mask! That will guarantee my health!</p>
<p>The next 2 chapters were sad. Mr. Keen tells us the sad story of his favourite record store going out of business and blaming it entirely on iTunes, and illegal file sharing. The sadness of his friends who will miss the choice and wisdom of the employees and how nothing will ever be the same&#8230; You know what? GET OFF MY LAWN. Things change. The vast majority of people prefer to pick and choose their songs. And in fact, this is nothing new&#8230; remember mix tapes? Isn&#8217;t that a collection of favourite songs, akin to an iPod play list? We have simply made the transportation mode more efficient. It is sad that the we won&#8217;t have the wisdom of a music geek&#8217;s opinion on music, but hell we get Ebert&#8217;s opinion on movies every day and ignore him.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s think of the radio. Here is a technology that music companies embrace, but yet isn&#8217;t that really delivering their artist&#8217;s art to billions of people for &#8220;free&#8221;? The music companies found a way to make that profitable. Keen pulls out of his ass the beautiful (and smelly) estimate of 20 billion songs being illegally downloaded in a year. Coincidentally, I this comes from the RIAA&#8217;s wonderfully amazing calculation that 40 songs are illegally downloaded for every song legally paid for on the Internet. Let&#8217;s do some math. The current belief is 24% of people in the world have some sort of internet connection. 6 billion people on the planet, therefore 1.44 billion people have internet. That means every person who has access to the internet anyhere in the world has downloaded 14 illegal songs and ~ 1/3 of a song legally. Plausible? Keen even refers to the legal download industry&#8217;s $1.1 billion a year business as &#8220;paltry&#8221;!! We live in a world where $1.1 billion is paltry? What <em>is</em> paltry is the number of companies to jump into this space! At $1.1bn if 3 companies each took 33% of the market they would be $400million companies. That means all 3 companies would be on Forbe&#8217;s list of the 400 most profitable companies! Hardly paltry.</p>
<p>None-the-less I am not condoning illegal activities, but the truth is that all technology can be copied and shared. The Internet simply provides a convenient way of doing so. As we have seen so many times before, fighting the Internet is futile. Embrace the technology and you can share your piece of a $1.1bn business space.</p>
<p>His next topic is of course video. Same argument really. A comment I really enjoyed was his quote: &#8220;Blockbuster [is] already hedging their bets by planning downloading services of their own&#8221;. Hedging bets?! I call that a smart CEO who is making good decisions. Give that guy a $90mil bonus!</p>
<p>There is a common theme in this book so far. Besides the fear-mongering, Internet is out to kill all things attitude, it is that everything is better if the person is professional at it. ie. I am no good as a writer because I don&#8217;t write as a profession. The entertainers on YouTube cannot provide good entertainment as they are not professionals. He deals in so many absolutes. I tend to believe this world isn&#8217;t absolute. I keep saying adapt to technology, but in reality I am aware this isn&#8217;t possible, and definitely isn&#8217;t a short term move. The point is that amateurs have their place in our society. Some of the best magic, juggling, entertainers I have seen were street side performers in squares and parks. That doesn&#8217;t mean they should all start websites and YouTube channels. Amateurism is a title and not an indication of skill. Let&#8217;s compare Susan Boyle to WIlliam Hung. Both of them are stars and relative amateurs, but I think that is too easy of a point to have to spell out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-continuing-social-networking-discussion-part-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Social Networking Discussion (part 1)</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-social-networking-discussion-part-1</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-social-networking-discussion-part-1#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 19:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Preface:</p> <p>Lately a phenomenon has taken off like many of the fads of the 80s we all love so much. Starting with the BBS systems in the late 70s and through the 90s we have had this intrinsic need to network with people at any distance via computer. With the web becoming more accessible, network [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Preface</span>:</p>
<p>Lately a phenomenon has taken off like many of the fads of the 80s we all love so much. Starting with the BBS systems in the late 70s and through the 90s we have had this intrinsic need to network with people at any distance via computer. With the web becoming more accessible, network speeds getting faster and the advent of many advanced web technologies we have seen phases like Classmates.com, Bebo, MySpace, Facebook and we are now looking at Twitter and the even weirder Omegle where you can (advantageously?) talk to a total stranger.</p>
<p>An ongoing trend throughout this advancement has been the Blog. Starting as Usenet threads and advancing to Weblogs and containing everything from political updates to fart counters, there has never been an outlet for expression that has been utilized by so many people. Useful or not, they are a social medium that won&#8217;t soon disappear.</p>
<p>Now, I am the very first to admit that many of these are time wasters and marketing gimmicks. I am also the first to admit that many people live too much of their lives collecting MySpace friends and looking up old highschool classmates that they would never speak to in any other capacity. And finally I will admit that there are heinous and illegal uses for each of these technologies. BUT, and let me be very clear on this, that doesn&#8217;t mean that they do not have a place in the social paradigm that any individual wishes to maintain.</p>
<p>And this brings me to my Easter weekend trip to a bookstore to find something to enjoy on my upcoming slew of flights. In my search for Malcolm Gladwell&#8217;s new <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1239910943&amp;sr=8-1">Outliers</a>, I found a fluorescent orange cover with the caption &#8220;<em>how blogs, MySpace, YouTube, and the rest of today&#8217;s user-generated media are destroying our economy, our culture, and our values</em>&#8220;. What a strong statement that is. Not only grouping together the 60+ million blogs as 1 entity, but comparing them to the pre-teen obsession that is MySpace and the completely different medium that YouTube boasts. Immediately Andrew Keen had grabbed my interest, as I am sure he intended to, and I decided that &#8220;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cult-Amateur-MySpace-user-generated-destroying/dp/0385520816/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1239910990&amp;sr=8-1">the cult of the amateur</a>&#8221; was a book I needed to read.</p>
<p>Now, I like to think I have an open mind. I enjoy a debate, and am always willing to try and understand why people have a certain point of view, regardless if I agree with it. And in fact Mr. Keen even reminds his readers to keep an open mind as he has been described in various media as everything from &#8220;The Anti-Christ of Silicon Valley&#8221;  to &#8220;The Martin Luther King of the Internet counterreformation&#8221;.  <span>Intrigued yet?</span></p>
<p>You will notice I have labeled this post as &#8216;part 1&#8242;, I have done so for the following reason: Never in my adult life have I ever put down a non-fiction book before reading it through. I am currently on page 45, half way through the 2nd chapter and have already considered doing so. This man takes generalizations and blatantly false information and is trying to sell them as the demise of society. Since I do not want to break my streak, I vow to read this book and write about any interesting subjects I can find, positive or negative I will try and form an objective opinion to post here. Today it is mostly negative&#8230;</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Forward to Chapter 1</span>:</p>
<p>Mr. Keen continually refers to all blogists as monkeys and relates blog entries/writers to &#8220;T. H. Huxley&#8217;s infinite monkey theorem&#8221;. (The theory that &#8220;If you give an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters they will eventually write a &#8216;Great American novel&#8217;&#8221;) Aside from the fact that it has been proven that Huxley did not come up with this phrase at all, blogists are in no way random and their intent is not to come up with the &#8216;Great American Novel&#8217;. Blogging is a medium to project thoughts, express opinions, dabble with poetry/art, offload stress, among <em>many </em>other things, but not on that list is any intent to write a piece of work that will be recognized by a publisher, let alone compete with Shakespeare or Fitzgerald.</p>
<p>He then goes on a rant about Wikipedia and how with no editors, no reporters and no expertise in reporting necessary to join: (I am quoting this as it is so preposterous)</p>
<blockquote><p>It&#8217;s the blind leading the blind &#8211; infinite monkeys providing infinite information for infinite readers, perpetuating the cycle of misinformation and ignorance.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>What?!</strong> Firstly, it is not the intent of Wikipedia to educate. Wikipedia is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About">very clear</a> that it is edited by anyone and no credentials are necessary. If people are misusing Wikipedia for education instead of entertainment that isn&#8217;t the fault of Wikipedia or a cause of social breakdown. In fact it is the exact opposite! Social breakdown is causing people to mistake entertainment for news. This has nothing to do with Wikipedia! Our education system has taught laziness and hasn&#8217;t updated to the new age we are in. Education has to change to support the media available. Like in my Economics class using the Internet to gather real time statistical data about the world stock markets to learn real world examples of market trends as opposed to using Wikipedia to find vague averages, or Google to find Forbes&#8217; lists.</p>
<p>Mr. Keen also claims that every post on Craigslist for free is taking away paid jobs at newspapers and that every Wikipedia reader is taking away money from Brittania&#8230; Again, setting aside that I am sure most local papers won&#8217;t post a request for a hot MMF ass orgy, and Encyclopedia Brittania contains no episode guide list for Futurama, I guess my small and simple point is that the <em>audiences aren&#8217;t the same</em>! I am sure the Venn Diagram looks like the MasterCard logo, but the overlap is not significant enough to impact large organizations like New York Times or Grolier! The decline in the circulation of newspapers and the sale of encyclopedias is attributed to the fact that people don&#8217;t read the morning newspaper, and don&#8217;t want a bookshelf of facts from A-Z that has the weight of a locomotive! Say what you will about the fact that people work 20 hours a day, check their Blackberries non-stop and require up-to-the-second news sent via txt msg, it is where we are. Adapt to it! Utilize the technology that is here to stay, don&#8217;t complain that it is stealing from you. Yes, video killed the radio star, and DVD bitch slapped VHS, no one at Sony yelled about technology changing, they made a different product! And comedians, musicians, newsmakers are more popular and wealthy then they were!</p>
<p>So, did you make it through that? I apologize for the long entry.  I am sorry that I am destroying our economy, culture and values, but as long as I continue to read this book I will do my best to keep that destruction down to the minimum&#8230; oh and yes, I get the irony that I am reviewing a book whose thesis is anti-blog in a blog&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-social-networking-discussion-part-1/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A View from the Street</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-view-from-the-street</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-view-from-the-street#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 11:58:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>As was my view in this entry of my blog, I can now provide even further proof of this ridiculous world we live in.</p> <p>Google Street View has recently come under fire when trying to photograph a specific town in England.</p> <p>Now the camera has been used by the public for about 100 years. Over [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As was my view in <a title="Social Commentary" href="http://stoss.ca/wp/2006/social-commentary" target="_blank">this entry</a> of my blog, I can now provide even further proof of this ridiculous world we live in.</p>
<p>Google Street View has <a title="treet View fans plan to descend on 'privacy' village for photo fest" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1166722/Watch-Broughton-Street-View-fans-plan-descend-privacy-village-photo-fest.html" target="_blank">recently come under fire</a> when trying to photograph a specific town in England.</p>
<p>Now the camera has been used by the public for about 100 years. Over those years there have been some drastic changes that now have evolved into digital pictures. Pictures that don&#8217;t physically exist, but that can be immediately transferred around the world. This evolved into Google Street View: The ability to see, given a postal code, an area in pictures.</p>
<p>Every single article I have ever read on this topic includes some form of this quote:</p>
<blockquote><p>But it has been accused of invading people&#8217;s right to privacy. Those left embarrassed include customers filmed leaving sex shops and a man caught being sick in the street.</p></blockquote>
<p>In fact some articles even <em>claim</em> that <a href="http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2350771.ece" target="_blank">divorces have been filed</a>, which of course seems <a href="http://idiotforever.com/2009/03/31/how-i-duped-the-sun/" target="_blank">really ridiculous</a>&#8230;</p>
<p>What the people in this particular village are now discovering is the same phenomenon that I spoke to before: By making a scene you are in the end screwing yourself over. Also known as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_Effect" target="_blank">Streisand Effect</a>.</p>
<p>Google Street View is <strong>not </strong>an invasion of privacy. Why? Privacy is the ability to keep things about <span style="text-decoration: underline;">you</span> private to you or a group of people. The front of your house is <strong>not</strong> <strong>a</strong> <strong>private</strong> matter. I am willing to concede that the ability to view a streamlined picture of an entire street could be used for evil, but in the same token so can phone books! Millions of telemarketers use phone books to call you every single day. All a phone book is is a collection of every phone number alphabetically for a town. All Street View is is a collection of house fronts for a village in the order they appear on the street!</p>
<p>All technologies have the ability to be used for undesirable purposes. Do you think it is a coincidence that when you are listed as single on Facebook ads for singles in your area appear in the toolbar? No! This site is data mining what you upload to try and entice you to buy something. 20 years ago a company would spend millions on researching people to figure out who was single, what age range some one was in, what their favourite movies are, and now we are voluntarily typing that data into an international database!? For Christ&#8217;s sake there are marketing people who have wet dreams about this sort of thing!</p>
<p>CCTV is all over the UK. I am on camera every single day. There are people everyday being caught coming out of sex shops, vomiting in the streets and yet someone taking a static, let me repeat, <strong>STATIC</strong> photo of your house is an invasion of privacy? Are you kidding me? I walk past houses everyday, I see though the front windows and sometimes see a family having dinner, sometimes see the tv on. Is it really private knowledge that people eat dinner and watch tv? Hell, a friend once told me she was coming home from work and her neighbour had the blinds open watching hardcore porn!</p>
<p>The bottom line here is that irrationality and un-education about a technology or a cause makes the situation worse. If all these people did was read <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/press/streetview/privacy/" target="_blank">Google&#8217;s Policy</a>, they could perfectly quietly ask to not have their pictures on the site, and Google will comply as several hundred people have done and no one would have known. (Coincidentally, just as you can do with the phone book)</p>
<p>Unfortunately my house is not on Google Street View, so I cannot show you my lovely flat and let you invade my &#8220;privacy&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-view-from-the-street/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>140 characters&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/140-characters</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/140-characters#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:19:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=53</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I am a bit of a geek. I like technology and I like understanding the various uses of that technology. I have spent the last month or so reading every news article I can about a new (I won&#8217;t say newest, because as we all know in this industry &#8220;newest&#8221; is outdated within minutes) phenomenon: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a bit of a geek. I like technology and I like understanding the various uses of that technology. I have spent the last month or so reading every news article I can about a new (I won&#8217;t say newest, because as we all know in this industry &#8220;newest&#8221; is outdated within minutes) phenomenon: Twitter.</p>
<p>I signed up for an <a title="Follow my Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/stossystoss">account</a> after some prodding from other fellow geeks and went on my way exploring my life 140 characters at a time. What I found out quite quickly is: My life in 140 characters is quite boring. I don&#8217;t mean to say I lead a boring life, in fact I argue far from it, but my thoughts and experiences as a whole are not sum-up-able in such arbitrarily small space (I mean even a txt message has 165 characters).</p>
<p><a title="Follow Stephen Fry's Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/stephenfry">Stephen Fry</a>, the &#8220;UK poster boy&#8221; for Twitter, tweets non-stop from what airport he is in, to what he had for lunch, to the amazing sunset he sees in Singapore. Now don&#8217;t get me wrong I am a huge fan of Stephen Fry. His brilliant comedy and sharp wit is some of the best the UK has to offer. (Watch <a title="QI" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380136/">QI</a> for an excellent display) But I don&#8217;t really need to know about every little thing he does, especially since: a) I will never meet him to discuss those thoughts and  b) I appreciate him because of his comedy based on his life experiences, not his life experiences themselves.</p>
<p>Then I stumbled across <a title="Follow cwalken's Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/cwalken">Christopher Walken</a>. How, here is a Twitter-er that actually is funny and only posted when something is necessary. Only one problem: It <a href="http://www.thewrap.com/ind-column/2057"><em>isn&#8217;t</em></a> Christopher Walken!</p>
<p>This started my brain in motion. This is the Internet, and as is too often the case the hot blonde 19 year old you are hitting on is a fat 45 year old Star Trek fan trying to make it big in the &#8220;Dear Penthouse&#8221; letter writing business. <em>Nothing </em>on the web is real. This blog isn&#8217;t real, it is a series of 1s and 0s cleverly placed to form something we can read. You don&#8217;t really have proof that the Stoss you know and love (well&#8230;know and put up with) is writing this article. In fact you have no idea where this article is even stored! Truth be told, I am writing it and I have no idea where it is stored. I pay an amount of money to people to let me use a computer and tie that space to a memorable mnemonic. (Fellow geeks will recall the original <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CompuServe#User_IDs_and_e-mail_addresses">CompuServ</a> who thought that complex number letter combination would be memorable, yeah, not so much.)</p>
<p>To some extent, aren&#8217;t we all a bit thinner, a bit more built, a bit smarter and a bit more popular on the web? Think about your Facebook, do you post the 3am picture of you stumbling drunk down a back alley to piss, or do you post the one that has perfect lighting and shows a great smile with you giving the shocker to thin air? We form an online persona to escape reality and befriend people we haven&#8217;t spoken to in 15 years just for the ability to brag that we have more than 500 hundred &#8220;friends&#8221;.</p>
<p>We don&#8217;t show our real selves on the net for the same reason we dress a bit nicer at work, or for the theatre, or when we go out to a club: We want people we don&#8217;t know to see us the way we want to be seen, not the way we actually are. We spend all this time in public school being told &#8220;be yourself&#8221; when the truth is, in ever y area of our lives we are someone different. This is actually an area discussed in <a href="http://www.gladwell.com/tippingpoint/index.html">The Tipping Point</a> a fantastic book that in one chapter discusses how our personalities are situational and mutable, not constant. You could even extend this theory to divorce, work problems etc. When the situations change, your mutate your personality, unknowingly and change the former perception of you to other parties.</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t going to change, and in fact I don&#8217;t want it to change. I enjoy being my-multiple-selves and I enjoy each wake of life as much as I can, but I am also aware that &#8220;I&#8221; is not a singular word. So enjoy your life, use Twitter and Facebook and MySpace, but don&#8217;t be fooled into believing you are that person. You are who you are, not what people read about you.</p>
<hr />Editor&#8217;s Note: cwalken, whose twitter page I mention in the post above has now been asked by Twitter to be changed to explicitly state that he is not Affiliated with the real Christopher Walken.</p>
<hr />Second Editor&#8217;s Note: Twitter has now <a href="http://crabbygolightly.com/mt/2009/03/cwalken_is_dead_msey_along_now.html">removed the page</a> and the ghost writer has come forward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/140-characters/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

