Attention to detail and credit where it’s due

Apparently some TV commentators made fools of themselves in the eyes of the geek community by not recognizing Tim Berners-Lee (who invented the hypertext transfer protocol, and with it the basis for hypertext markup language, thus the world wide web) when he appeared in the London Olympics opening ceremony.

I grinned in recognition (he’s still very relevant today) and called out to my kids to come and see him. They’d last seen him in Aleks Krotoski‘s fabulous The Virtual Revolution series on TVNZ7 (RIP) so it was no big deal to them.

A detail I didn’t absorb at the time was that he was using a NeXT cube … historically accurate, as apparently that was the gear he used to develop the www. I did notice the big fat CRT monitor, and wondered why they didn’t use a flat panel, but didn’t quite make the connection … ha! Details.

20120729-122441.jpg

As Buzz Anderson points out, the OS I’m using to write this now is a descendant …

And let’s not forget as we celebrate the web’s birthday that the very first web browser and server were written using NeXTStep—the direct ancestor of Apple’s Cocoa framework, which today powers the Mac, iPhone, and iPad. Great frameworks are essential to developer creativity.

Before you say it: Yep. Apple fan boy, me.

– P

Loving the Olympics

20120729-093725.jpg

Like millions of others, I eagerly watched the Olympics opening ceremony and enjoyed the spectacle. I love the Olympics, and revel in the celebration of elite sports men and women — the best in the world in their field — pushing boundaries and ‘going for gold’.

Doping scandals and steroids aside, the Olympic spirit encapsulates the dedication and commitment to be the best they can be. Terms like ‘world record’ and ‘personal best’ abound, rightly, as those involved pursue their destiny.

The other thing that’s striking to me is just how attractive some of these athletes are. Good golly, what a gene pool! Even without doping, the testosterone and estrogen levels must be through the roof.

I’m lookling forward to the Games.

– P

The Simon Lusk stigma?

In defence of the National Party’s right to determine WHO holds positions of influence in the Party, and to exclude those it sees as ‘negative’…

It seems the judgement by those in the National Party higher echelons that Hawkes Bay’s Simon Lusk is a Danger To The Party persists.

I mentioned earlier that leaked National Party minutes were reported wherein Simon Lusk, who apparently operates as a kind of ‘behind the scenes’ ‘campaign advisor’ for hire (by referral only) was described as someone motivated by ‘a very negative agenda for the Party’ ‘that poses a serious risk to the Party‘.

In a new development: if Simon Lusk’s sometime promoter/accomplice (co-accused?) attack blogger Cameron Slater is to be believed (a stretch at times as others have observed) it seems wannabe National Party candidates are being screened for exclusion by the Party with a question which asks them if they are or have ever been ‘affiliated’ to Simon Lusk. (Whatever that means!)

*IF* this claim by Cameron Slater is true, it seems the shadowy Simon Lusk has made an impression on the National Party leadership — but NOT a good one. An association with him appears to be toxic to the career of any aspirant Party candidate ...

What happened to freedom of association? you may ask. Yeah, well, it crossed my mind too. But let me play devil’s advocate for a moment and defend the National Party hierarchy’s absolute right to exclude what they see as malign influences from the Party of which they are stewards. (I’m not saying that they’re the devil!)

The men and women in National’s leadership making those judgements about Simon Lusk and Cameron Slater can’t just be said to be stupid or ill-informed, despite the near constant rain of abuse and denigration poured on some of them in a bombastic, jingoistic manner e.g. ‘Goodfellow and his stooges’ etc as a reference to the Party President? Tsk tsk.

Harry Truman said: "If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog." Looks like Simon Lusk (above) already has.

A case of ‘Give a dog a bad name’?

Presumably, *IF* Cameron Slater is reporting accurately (yeah, I know) Simon Lusk is a marked man. And so are his apprentices. It’s a combination of give a dog a bad name and birds of a feather.* The Simon Lusk stigma, basically.

There have to be, surely, what top National Party figures regard as sound reasons beyond personality politics for those conclusions. Don’t there?

A vendetta is a “negative agenda”

I’ve been puzzling about what National’s senior whip Michael Woodhouse (who wrote the leaked minute) could have meant by his description of Simon Lusk as posing a ‘serious risk to the Party’ and driving a ‘very negative agenda for the Party’. Hmmm.
Continue reading →

Laughing all the way to the Banks

Laughing all the way to the ... oh, hang on. No, that won't work ... Oh, well, LAUGHING anyway.

‘Insufficient evidence’

From one Banksy to another —

Police have decided they won’t prosecute ACT Party leader and sole MP John Banks for [alleged] electoral law offences relating to him improperly declaring tens of thousands of dollars of campaign donations as ‘anonymous’ when he’d personally solicited those very donations … because they can’t prove he knowingly filed a false return of electoral expenses (which includes a declaration of donations).

Here is the phrase the police used (three times!) to describe their reasoning, as outlined to complainant, Labour MP Trevor Mallard…

Police were unable to establish that MR BANKS had the necessary knowledge that the donation had been recorded as anonymous in the return before he signed it and submitted it. The return was compiled by a campaign volunteer. Mr Banks sought and received confirmation that it was an accurate return of his expenses before signing and transmitting the return. Police are therefore of the view that there is insufficient evidence to consider a prosecution in respect of section 134(1).

It’s worth reading the police letter to Trevor Mallard (.pdf) in full.

Of course, one-eyed John Banks supporters will exalt in this escape from prosecution, one of them already describing the outcome as ‘no case to answer’, and the prime minister apparently saying police had ‘cleared’ Mr Banks.

I think that’s wishful thinking and the situation is somewhat better described thus, by Law Professor Andrew Geddis in his article at pundit.co.nz: John Banks – not unlawful, just incompetent

Continue reading →

London Olympics. Of course Banksy will contribute

Subversive graffiti artist, thought-provoker and social commentator Banksy appears to be, erm, making his mark …

With this:

… and this:

So far.

via Fast Company.

Margaret Mahy lived the dream. And then some.

What an inspiration she was. Making a living from her wits. And so much more.
Haere ra Margaret Mahy. Thank you.
– P

Ask Jay Rosen …

I mentioned recently in ‘Declaring where you’re coming from‘ how thought-provoking I find some of what NYU journalism prof Jay Rosen has to say about the present and unfolding future of news media journalism.

Here, via Andrew Sullivan is a link to a work-in-progress: Ask Jay Rosen Anything

It’s also worth following some of Andrew’s links in his post.

– P

When celebrity stalking becomes something else

I can see why email marketers might use this, and, well, OK. And private investigators, well, just OK. But who else ...? Stalkers? Hmmm.

Some of us of have heard of the email tracking service ReadNotify.

Former National Party insider and ACC claimant-whistleblower-conversation recorder-lightning rod Bronwyn Pullar used it or something like it to ‘trace’ her emails to ACC (and who knows whom or where else?) and demonstrate, at least to her own satisfaction, that they’d been opened. Repeatedly.

Here’s a story from BuzzFeed about a music fan who repeatedly emailed superstar Jay Z, tracking the messages  using the ReadNotify ‘bug’ system. He never received a real reply, and wanted to publish a book of his ‘sent messages’ to Jay Z  …  read it yourself.

I found the tale interesting but vaguely unsatisfying.

How would you know if YOUR email communication from someone you’d never met was being traced in this way … along with your actual geographic movements? How would you feel?

It reminds me of the clever assassination techniques attributed to Israeli intelligence e.g. packing a duplicate cell phone with explosive, somehow slipping it to their PLO ‘target’ … then blowing his head off remotely, with a phone call.

For some, privacy can be a matter of life or death. For celebrities … well, it’s still a value, surely? Paparazzi intrude all the time, wanting snatched photos of kids etc — crossing boundaries and making money from stealing people’s privacy. The UK’s Leveson inquiry is revealing how low some in the ‘press’ will stoop in pursuit of an edge.

Tracking The Biggest Star In The World

by John Herman at BuzzFeed

… “[Jay] has opened every single one of my emails, even re-opening them to re-read,” says Johnson. “He has clicked on links and had emails open for as long as 20 minutes.” He knows this because he uses a tool called ReadNotify, which embeds a small, unique invisible image in every message he sends. When the message is opened, the image loads from ReadNotify’s servers, which record the time of the view, its duration and rough location. ReadNotify then gives the sender a read receipt, confirming that the message was seen. These services have been around for years, and they work — this kind of “bugging” is an old email marketing trick.

We're being tracked anyway, right?

At first, Johnson didn’t give the read notifications much credence. “I told my wife, ‘This must not be his actual email — maybe it’s a secretary of some sort opening these for him,'” Johnson told me. He seemed relatively confident that this was the right address from the start— he declined to mention how he found it, only that he believes very few people have it. But then he started noticing the locations.On November 23, 2010, two days before Jay-Z was scheduled to play a show with U2 in New Zealand, one of Johnson’s emails was opened near Auckland. Another, sent while Jay-Z was vacationing in France, was opened from an iPhone in Paris. Messages were opened in Geneva, Denver, London, Manchester, Sydney, Philadelphia, and East Hampton.

I was at that U2 concert in Auckland. With my iPhone. Tracked. Just sayin’.

– P

via Dave Pell Next Draft

Preventing cyberstalking and breaches of privacy

We’ve been discussing cyberstalking and the abuse of private information on the web at an individual level. (hint: You want private? Don’t put it on the web!) But there’s more to it than unguarded Facebook comments and anonymous trolling.

I remember I first made Jacqueline’s acquaintance here at The Paepae after I commented on the Herald on Sunday — staffed by ‘pond scum’ & ‘reprobates’ as broadcaster Mike Hosking calls them 🙂 — gloating er, sorry, explaining how they tracked Jackie to her home, to photograph her opening her front door from the street when a reporter knocked at it … via Facebook, they said — a contention she still insists is implausible, BTW.

Those actions struck me then, and strike me now as an unjustified invasion of her privacy. (See my post: ‘Facebook leaks like a sieve (Part 2)‘ and comments stream re David Fisher’s assurances.)

But here’s an interesting article which takes a different, more serious approach to cyber-security and information privacy — protecting yourself from perfectly legal gummint snooping!

5 Essential Privacy Tools For The Next Crypto War

by Jon Matonis Forbes magazine

Read it at Forbes if you want to find out what you can do to protect your ‘email privacy‘ (“[these] products, when used correctly, offer subpoena-proof email communication”) or how to encrypt your data for ‘file privacy‘ as well as ‘voice privacy‘, ‘chat privacy‘ and ‘traffic privacy‘.

“subpoena-proof” is an interesting description of a standard, dontcha think?

I don’t do any of these, in the (possibly mistaken) belief that I’m an innocent civilian without any real secrets to protect, since I left MI5 (joke). Gee. Do you think I’ll be OK? (I guess Matt Blomfield will be wishing the trove of emails and other data that found its way to Cameron Slater had been encrypted.)

What do you think?

– P

Corrosion

Two unrelated (except that they’re comments about American poltiicians) excerpts from articles that jumped out at me recently. As they do.

First, from What if he’d made it earlier?  David Runciman’s (London Review of Books) review of the latest instalment in Robert Caro’s epic record of LBJ  The Years of Lyndon Johnson, Vol. IV: The Passage of Power

…. In late 1963 Johnson held court at his ranch in Texas, where he invited West Germany’s new chancellor, Ludwig Erhard, for a state visit. It was a triumphant success. The Washington press corps, which had spent the previous years mocking Johnson’s down-home corniness, now revelled in it (it’s amazing what power will do to journalists as well). Johnson was relaxed and welcoming, holding informal press conferences on his front lawn. One of these took place on Christmas Day, when Johnson introduced all 27 members of his extended family who had come for Christmas dinner. These included his two daughters, Lucy and Lynda. ‘Lynda was wearing her Christmas gift from her father,’ Caro writes, ‘a loose-fitting red shift; [Johnson] reached out and bundled up the fabric, to prove, he said with a smile, that she wasn’t in a family way.’ Lynda was 19 at the time. How the journalists laughed.

While he was charming the press corps that Christmas, he was also turning the screws on their bosses. Johnson was determined to get the Texas newspapers that had criticised him in the past to come back on board. He wanted their pledges to support him put in writing. And if they didn’t deliver, he warned them that he would use his power as president to ruin them. He told the publishers of the Houston Chronicle that he required a signed letter promising to support him so long as he remained in office. If he didn’t get that letter he would block a planned bank merger that the owners of the newspaper were depending on. Johnson’s advisers warned him that now he was president this sort of brazen horse-trading might not be wise. Did he really have to get the quid pro quo in writing? Yes, Johnson said, he did. And anyway, the letter need only specify the quo, not the quid: the promise of support, not the reward. But without it, the bank deal was off. Johnson got his letter. He locked it in a drawer. And the Houston Chronicle never wavered in its support throughout his presidency.

Wow. Pledges of support from his critics. Johnson knew how to put people under pressure.

They say NZ PM Robert Muldoon had a signed, undated letter of resignation from each one his cabinet ministers locked in a drawer. (Might just be a legend.)

Second, this assessment of Mitt Romney from Howard Fineman ‘Mitt Romney Taxes Controversy Shows He’s Still A Tough Sell‘…

… That [Romney’s ‘inevitability’ as GOP candidate] is the real, unspoken political meaning behind the remarkable, rising chorus of voices calling on the presumptive party nominee to release more of his federal tax returns to the public.

“The fact is, no one likes the guy or believes in him,” said the campaign manager for a former Romney rival, who declined to be quoted by name because his former boss is on record supporting Romney’s campaign against incumbent President Barack Obama.

“Look back at our 2008 primaries,” he said. “Who did all the other candidates dislike? Romney. Look at this year. Who did all the other candidates dislike? Romney. No one wants Obama to win, but no one likes the guy who is running against him.”

Republican leaders, especially conservatives, see Romney as a malleable, cynical power-grabber without principle or compass. They warned voters that Romney would be unable to take the fight to Obama on health care because he had fostered a similar program as governor of Massachusetts, and they argued that a wealthy, well-connected son of privilege was not a good spokesman for selling free-market ideas to the middle-class.

Gosh. “a malleable, cynical power-grabber without principle or compass” — that’s as damning as anything I’ve read about him. About any politician. And I’ve read a bit.

– P

Judge David Harvey spikes ‘the enemy’ guns

David Lange once said, ‘He who lives by the quip, dies by the quip’.

Sometimes Justice can be blonde.

“The problem is not technology. The problem is behaviour. We have met the enemy and he is us.”
— Justice David Harvey at NetHui

Judge David Harvey’s later pun about the United States being ‘the enemy’ in a discussion about the American push in the Trans Pacific Partnership ‘free trade’ talks to extend the copyright period to 70 years after the creator’s death and impose other moves has led today to him withdrawing from the Kim Dotcom extradition case.

The reference to ‘the enemy’ was a play on words referencing the Walt Kelly quote ‘We have met the enemy and he is us’.

It’s been interpreted by the simple, the gullible and Judge Harvey’s enemies as a POSSIBLE indicator of bias, hence his decision to withdraw. Better to stand aside than to offer scope for an appeal on such spectral grounds.

Too bad. Judge Harvey was, arguably (and certainly in my opinion), our best-qualified jurist to deal with the case. But never mind.

His enemies delight in this, of course — including those he has convicted of varieties of moral turpitude (or ‘summary offences‘, as one of the grossest of them has spluttered bitterly, demonstrating — if such evidence was needed — that the convict remains stuck in the ‘denial’ or ‘bargaining’ phase of the grief process.)

It seems plain Judge Harvey was being a bit of a wit, a raconteur, rather than displaying a lack of impartiality.

Still, better safe than sorry. Justice has to be seen to be done.

Them’s the breaks.

– P

Flacks will always try this on. Resist.

Reporter or campaign mouthpiece? Make a choice. (NY Times - click)

The New York Times reports in a vaguely-nauseating article ‘Latest Word on the Trail? I Take It Back‘ on the increasing use of ‘quote approval’ by the US presidential campaigns as a condition of interviews with people associated with the campaigns.

I’ve never agreed to that request when asked by ‘newsmakers’ at all levels, or their minders. It crosses a line. That’s not news, it’s PR …

Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations
— George Orwell

An interview can be an adversarial event, or a collaborative one. But giving your subject a right of veto over any part of your article (as opposed to fact-checking) is a ludicrous loss of posture.
It also severs the fair expectation of truthfulness our readers/audience have a right to expect.

Who are you working for?

Many journalists spoke about the editing only if granted anonymity, an irony that did not escape them. No one said the editing altered the meaning of a quote. The changes were almost always small and seemingly unnecessary, they said.

Those who did speak on the record said the restrictions seem only to be growing. “It’s not something I’m particularly proud of because there’s a part of me that says, ‘Don’t do it, don’t agree to their terms,’ ” said Major Garrett, a correspondent for The National Journal. “There are times when this feels like I’m dealing with some of my editors. It’s like, ‘You just changed this because you could!’ ”

– P

The Warrior – by Chuck Girard

I mentioned Chuck Girard’s album Written on the Wind recently as part of my eclectic musical ‘heritage’.
My pal Graeme and I remembered Girard (who always struck me as a lost Beach Boy) and a few of his fellow inspirers like Barry McGuire and Larry Norman at lunch today… so I pulled this track up, moved by nostalgia. Wooooah! Goosebumps.

The Warrior. Play it loud.


MP3 file (6MB)

Wow. Still moves me.

– P

PS It’s right at home, musically, next to The Who’s Tommy.

There goes the whole appeal of Facebook for some personality types … well, not really

Glad tidings? Pfft! (NZ Herald - click)

In the same way that locks are only really designed to keep out honest people, this ‘dramatic’ change to how Facebook operates will, in reality, be of minimal effect.

We’ve discussed the (lack of) privacy of material posted on the world’s largest social network before. Birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim, some people gotta SNOOP.

With Facebook, like everything from cars to massage oil, how you use it makes all the difference. And how you use it reflects your character, in my opinion.

There are plenty of fake profiles and stalking going on. Not just ex-spouses etc. Some social media battledogs like you-know-who admit they create fake profiles to ‘follow’ or ‘friend’ (as a verb!) their prey. We’ve seen that.

The rather odd spectacle of former ACT acolyte Clint Heine being pursued by an online adversary … now in the ongoing trainwreck of a couple of comment threads here at The Paepae (of all places) should be instructive.

Fake people are not the same as anonymous people, as I tried to explain here. Sometimes there are good reasons to remain anonymous.

But with impersonation, unless it’s art or satire (like the absolutely-superb-by-anyone’s-standards parodies: @DrBrash or @MayorEmanuel) the deceit is fatal to credibility (e.g. property spruiker Sean Wood’s sockpuppet performance as his own satisfied customer ‘MUFFIT’).

Call me naive (I’ve been called worse) but I put astro-turfing, the faking of grass roots support or a ‘movement’ in the same class. Deceit.

But things can evolve, like bacteria.

Facebook, so much a part of hundreds of millions of people’s lives, will of course, reflect humanity’s greatness and our wretchedness. What else should we expect?

– P

 

IDEA: Turning payphones into free Wi-fi hotspots

Read at gigaom: New York starts turning payphones into free Wi-fi hotspots

20120715-163510.jpg

Smart idea.

-P