The Slamlander

Gary (Electricstorm at UF, a fellow diabetic) also sent me and email to this link about a possible new understanding that could lead to a potentially total cure for diabetes.

Gary (Electric Storm @ UF) sent me this little beauty.

This revocation can have unforeseen carry-on costs. Windows’ anti-piracy component, WGA, is tied to system hardware components. Windows allows you to make a small number of system hardware changes after which you need to renew your Windows license (the exact details of what you can and can’t get away with changing has been the subject of much debate). If a particular piece of hardware is deactivated (even just temporarily while waiting for an updated driver to work around a content leak) and you swap in a different video card or sound card to avoid the problem, you risk triggering Windows’ anti-piracy measures, landing you in even more hot water. If you’re forced to swap out a major system component like a motherboard, you’ve instantly failed WGA validation. Revocation of any kind of motherboard-integrated device (practically every motherboard has some form of onboard audio, and all of the cheaper ones have integrated video) would appear to have a serious negative interaction with Windows’ anti-piracy measures.

I’m reading it and hoping that it’s a spoof except that I narrowly avoided being employed by a Dutch DRM company last year, they were bought out (MSFT) and they were working on this stuff.

Vista’s content protection requires that devices (hardware and software drivers) set so-called “tilt bits” if they detect anything unusual. For example if there are unusual voltage fluctuations, maybe some jitter on bus signals, a slightly funny return code from a function call, a device register that doesn’t contain quite the value that was expected, or anything similar, atilt bit gets set. Such occurrences aren’t too uncommon in a typical computer. For example starting up or plugging in a bus-powered device may cause a small glitch in power supply voltages, or drivers may not quite manage device state as precisely as they think. Previously this was no problem – the system was designed with a bit of resilience, and things will function as normal. In other words small variances in performance are a normal part of system functioning. Furthermore, the degree of variance can differ widely across systems, with some handling large changes in system parameters and others only small ones. One very obvious way to observe this is what happens when a bunch of PCs get hit by a momentary power outage. Effects will vary from powering down, to various types of crash, to nothing at all, all triggered by exactly the same external event.

With the introduction of tilt bits, all of this designed-in resilience is gone. Every little (normally unnoticeable) glitch is suddenly surfaced because it could be a sign of a hack attack. The effect that this will have on system reliability should require no further explanation.

What?!?! You wanted a reliable system, forget it with Vista! Remember that all this is to prevent the user from excersizing their legal ‘Fair Use’ rights.

Frankly, I don’t see this passing EU muster and MSFT is already on the dock for failing to remove Windows Media Player (Why the fuck does a server have to have media player?) and is facing multi-million Euro per day fines as it is. I foresee an entirely new court case out of this. The US Department of Justice should have broken up MSFT when it had the last opportunity.

With the US buck down on its knees, the Iranian move towards the Euro may spread to Venezuela. Although Iran and Venezuela have a contentious relationship with the US right now, this is assuredly not the motive. In fact, had that been the case, they should have done it over six months ago.

The deal is that the falling buck is causing too much price volatility in the oil and gas markets and it doesn’t look like stabilizing any time soon. OPEC, in order to keep stable prices, has been seriously considering this for some time. Even the act of changing is going to add some volatility to the market. Although the EURO is fairly new, it is showing all the symptoms of being an extremely stable currency. What helps this is the Stability Pact that countries in the EuroZone have to commit to. Europe also, as a whole, doesn’t have the huge trade imbalance that the US has.

The problem for the OPEC countries is that in one day, they take a payment in US bucks and before midnight of that same day, the US buck has fallen 4-5% verses the EURO. On 100M dollars of oil shipments this is a dead loss of 4-5 Million dollars, before the day is even closed. If they had gotten their payments in Euros then the wouldn’t have those losses. This same US buck dependent volatility creates problems for them all the way down the line, destroying profits as it goes. Another example, Chevron buys oil, in Saudi Arabia, paid for in US bucks. Saudi Arabia, knowing that some of those bucks are going to die, over charges by 5%. Chevron then ships it to France for refining, where it has to import it in EURO anyway because France is in the EuroZone. Wham! An instant loss of another 4-5% drop, plus the 5% overcharge, plus another 3% that the falling Buck dropped while the oil was being shipped, for a worst-case 13% loss just to get it to the refinery. Duh!

Is anyone still wondering why they’re seriously considering changing? My question regards why it has taken this long for them to start considering the Euro to replace the US buck as the standard oil currency.

The downside at the US gas pump is that the prices will fluctuate a lot more, in a mostly upwards direction. Because this move will force all the volatility onto the US oil economy, giving the rest of us a breather.

Remember that only the US, with its huge budget deficit and even larger trade deficit, is responsible for the falling/dieing buck. Bush has been ignoring both issues since his first term and he continues to ignore them going forward.

So Ray Bradbury was correct, we are the martians

He’s been a tireless worker for them and their best interests.

What I don’t understand is why the Hamas resistance to a call for early elections. This is an opportunity for Hamas to prove that they really do have the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people. It can only go one of two ways, they can either win again or lose.

If Hamas repeats it’s win of last January, and this time the Abbas is putting his own office up on the blocks as well, then they will have consolidated their position. Fatah members can then concentrate on bugging their families out of Palestine. If Hamas loses then Fatah can concentrate on putting their country back together, with a probably more contrite populous. A populous now probably more open to dealing with Israel and less tolerant of rogue org missile launches. However, it’s all a gamble. If Hamas boycotts such an election, which I am certain they will, and the populous listens, then a Palestinian civil war is inevitable and it’s not clear which side would win, in such a conflict. On the other hand, if Hamas calls for a boycott and the people don’t listen while voting Hamas out, then Hamas will have a serious loss to consider. This is the only reason I can think of for their resistance. Hamas honestly thinks that they might lose. I say; let the election happen and let the Palestinian people declare their mind to the world.

Central to this debate is the recognition of Israel and the renunciation of violence, which Fatah and Palestine have done years ago, when Arafat was still alive, and Hamas wants to rescind, calling all of Israel the occupied lands and vowing to reclaim Israel as part of Palestine and removing or killing all the Jewish interlopers, man, woman, and child. This is an unconscionable position, in violation of all prior agreements. It is also unrealistic, inhumane, and tantamount to a declaration of genocide against the Israeli people.

Remember that Hamas co-claims many, if not most, of the rocket launches into Israel. Acts that, even in times of war, are called war-crimes, by global international agreement. The indiscriminate launching of a weapon of war into a civilian population is universally considered a war-crime, aside from being a direct act of war. This is what Hamas does or is responsible for every day and the Palestinian people all know this. They elected Hamas into power last January, knowing this. Now that they’ve tasted the bitterness of inevitable consequence, they should be given an opportunity to re-think that choice. Abbas is showing a great deal of trust in his people. Of course, if he losses this bet then Abbas and his family will probably be at the head of the refugee line, leaving Palestine, ASAP.

cheers and may you have many more young man

Someone recently tried to compare HTML standards body World Wide Web Consortium to a real standards body and the HTML standards to the PAL broadcast standard. I was going to respond directly in the thread but realized that this fallacy requires a broader more open response. There are too many people that argue ignorantly about this.

• NTSC – Managed by the FCC which was formed by the US Government, as a regulatory body. Their regulations carry the force of law.
• PAL – Managed by the ITU, which is a special agency of the UN.
• SECAM –
• ATSC – Is being reviewed by the FCC for use in the US.

Okay, NTSC, PAL, ATSC and SECAM are technically commercially developed standards but they are now administered by real standards enforcing organizations; FCC, ITU, etc. Special note: they are all governmental organizations whose regulation can carry the force of law.

To recap:

• FCC = US Government
• ITU = UN
• ICANN = Department of Commerce, US Government (Just for fun here, another real standards body)
• W3C = ???
• W3C != a recognized standards body due to lack of governmental support.

Note that NTSC, PAL, and SECAM were all developed by relavent market leaders at the time; RCA, Thomson, and Telefunken. Note further that once released, the standards did not change!

This is a current issue because the W3C decided that they were going to implement CSS their way and attempt to force Microsoft into their implementation. MS implemented parts that were backwards compatible and ignored the rest. This is why IE and Firefox see the Internet in slightly different ways. The W3C has been exacerbating the differences ever since and not paying the slightest attention to Microsoft’s, or anyone else’ issues.

The reality is that the W3C regulates less than 5% of the web, everyone else follows Microsoft, who considers the W3C to be irrelevant.

Note: Get one of FCC, ITU, EC to adopt the W3C HTML standards and IE will be there so fast that your head will spin.

I went here and got a pop up.

We see you’re using Internet Explorer, which is not compatible with this site. We strongly suggest downloading Firefox. We think you’ll like it better:

Of all the fucking nerve! They can KMA! Firefox has a number of vulnerabilities against it at the moment. Yes, IE reads the site just fine. More FUD, worse than Microsoft FUD.

I use IE. A very well secured IE. Yes, this is my choice and I am quite happy with it.They can kiss my ass!

Does Israel finally come in out of the ambiguous cold?

“Iran openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map,” Olmert said. “Can you say that this is the same level, when you are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America, France, Israel, Russia?”

It doesn’t look like much, does it? Frankly, I don’t see where this is admitting anything and it looks and smells like a Pulitzerization.Does this really say what they state it does? To me, it doesn’t parse like that, even out of context.

Yes, a nuclear Israel is probably one of the worst kept open secrets out there. Everyone knows that they have 100-200 bombs but Israel never confirms or denies, leaving their opponents to guess, in nervousness. You have to admit that the strategy, whether or not they actually have the nukes, has been working for them. It is suspected that, that is some of the reason behind the treaties with Jordan and Egypt. Some analysts even suspect that for the reason why Saudi Arabia isn’t more anti-Israel. This ambiguity is also the reason that they aren’t pressed into signing the non-proliferation treaty (NPT). They simply refuse to engage at that level, with its open inspections and whatnot.

For a country in Israel’s position, surrounded by enemies and barely trusted friends, ambiguity is good, very good. I suspect that it is also very good for the region. This nuclear uncertainty definitely blunts any rambunctious plans of its neighbors, like Syria, who along with Iran, is one of the last hold-outs of the “Wipe Israel Out” club. Israel doesn’t even have to do anything except smile knowingly while Damascus and Tehran have advisers telling them that those cities would not be improved by the sudden growth of twenty megaton mushroom clouds. Mushroom clouds have no silver lining and Israel never has to explicitly make any threats. As long as they leave it ambiguous, the threat is always implied.

Of course, it could also be the biggest hoax in history, as well and this could all simply be a reminder of everyone’s suspected “facts”, that Israel might have the bomb. But then again, they might not. Do they really have the bomb? Not even their hair dressers know for sure and everyone knows better than to ask a spook a straight question.

I do not remember where. But, this pretty much highlights it. It’s from the LA Times (No, NOT Loozanna you buffoon!).