You can't use a smartphone on an airplane -- even in "airplane mode"

Current FAA regulations say you can't use a smartphone on an airplane -- even if the phone portion of the unit is disabled:

Travel: ATA Tries To Have You Arrested For Using Your iPhone In "Airplane Mode" - Consumerist

...Well, as much as ATA's attendents were dicks about it, they were right Buried in the Contract of Carriage under Rule 190 (Baggage) on page 37 it reads: '...Cellular phones, cellular phone games and pager use is prohibited after door closing and should remain off in flight. This includes cell phones equipped with airplane mode function.'...

This was taken from the comments section about a man threatened with arrest for using his iPhone, in airplane mode, on an airplane.

So if you have a separate phone and a PDA, you can turn off the phone and use the PDA. If you have a smartphone though, you must turn off the phone and the PDA both.

Except that mostly flight attendants ignore the rule and treat a phone that's not be an ear as though it were a generic device.

Until the plane lands, at with point if you have a separate phone and a PDA, you can turn on the phone but you must turn off the PDA. If you have a smartphone though, you can use both.

Does anyone think we have a problem here?

Not to mention that whenever I open a laptop on a plane, it shows me every laptop with an open WiFi peer-to-peer port on the plane. (I then remember to turn off my WiFi.)

Sigh.

The future of the POB?

The coalition that ruled America from 2000 to 2006 is, the world prays, in its death throes. The increasingly shattered GOP is now better known as the POB ...

Grasping Reality with Both Hands: Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal

... As one of my ex-Republican friends put it yesterday: the left-wing Democrats are the party of Jefferson and Roosevelt, the right-wing Democrats are the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower, and today's Republicans are the party of Bozo...

So where is the POB going? More importantly, how many Americans belong to the POB?

I think we'd do ok with two years of Democrat control of the Presidency and the Congress, but in the longer run I'd like a GOP, not POB, controlled Senate.

Assuming that Clinton takes the White House [1], who will reform the POB? I don't like Guiliani, but I have to admit the man has a certain stubborn quality that might make him an effective POB reformer.

[1] I'm an Edwards supporter myself, but I'd throw a victory party for Clinton or Obama too.

Thank you Mr. Gore

Gore and UN panel win Nobel prize.

Too cheap to bill: storage and electricity

This post is neat on various levels. Read the whole thing to see what he says about the cost of storage:

Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Storage: too cheap to meter?: "I saw Chris Anderson make a presentation in which he quoted the famous 1954 prediction by Lewis Strauss, the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, that 'our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter.' Having paid my own electric bill last night, I think I can say with confidence that Strauss was slightly off in his forecast."

Storage costs have fallen much faster than the costs of bandwidth or processing power. On the other hand, electricity costs may start rising exponentially over the next few years. Rising electricity costs and the limits of CPU design may mean that in the near future processing costs will rise, but electricity rise may have less impact on storage.

Storage costs look to keep dropping for many years to come. Sooner or later, and maybe sooner, storage may be bundled as a freebie with services such as bandwidth.

Its interesting to think about what relative costs of computing, including heat dissipation, will do to the design of our end-to-end computing environment over the next few years. Getting that right is worth so much money I'm sure a lot of people have thought it out in depth -- but not published all the results.

Captcha death: My DeLong comment fails

I was trying to submit a comment to Brad DeLong's typepad based blog:

Grasping Reality with Both Hands: Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal - typepad comments

Verify your comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This test is used to prevent automated robots from posting comments.

I authenticated using my TypePad ID, but I was still asked to pass the captcha test. I tried four times, but the captcha kept getting more and more cryptic. I had to give up.

I swear I have a high res 21" LCD and I can still read. True, I am a bit demented, but so is everyone over 25.

I assume that captcha difficulty is being driven by the spam wars. I think we've now hit the wall. The spam technology and/or techniques have defeated the captcha.

It's time for phase II - the end of anonymous comments and robust identity management.

Twenty years of wasted cycles ...

No surprises in this article:

86 Mac Plus Vs. 07 AMD DualCore. You Won't Believe Who Wins

... When we compare strictly common, everyday, basic user tasks between the Mac Plus and the AMD we find remarkable similarities in overall speed, thus it can be stated that for the majority of simple office uses, the massive advances in technology in the past two decades have brought zero advance in productivity."

See also my post on FullWrite Professional. I work with some very sophisticated developers using cutting edge .NET libraries, domain specific languages and very complex architectures ... but I also remember when programs written in Macintosh Pascal were reliable and fast on hardware that couldn't run a modern phone.

I suspect we'd be better off today if we'd stuck with Pascal and never touched C++. A 1990 geek would be shocked by how little improvement we've seen over the past 18 years.

On the other and, I wouldn't try editing a 12MB Canon CRF file on that Mac Plus!

From Napster to Amazon: A Yahoo! insider's DRM history and projections

This gentleman has been around -- from WinAmp's Napster-associated glory days to an exec position at Yahoo! Music. He says Yahoo! is done with DRM ... (for music, anyway!)

Convenience Wins, Hubris Loses and Content vs. Context, a Presentation for Some Music Industry Friends at FISTFULAYEN

... But now, eight years later, Amazon’s finally done what was clearly the right solution in 1999. Music in the format that people actually want it in, with a Web-based experience that’s simple and works with any device. I bought tracks from Amazon (Kevin Drew and No Age), downloaded them, sync’d them to my new iPod Nano, and had them playing in my home audio system (Control 4) in less than five minutes. PRAISE JESUS. It only took 8 years.

8 years. How much opportunity have we lost in those 8 years? How much naivety and hubris did we have when we said, “if we build it they will come”? What did we spend? And what did we gain? We certainly didn’t gain mass user adoption or trust, two prerequisites to success on the Internet.

Inconvenient experiences don’t have Web-scale potential, and platforms which monetize the gigantic scale of the Web is the only way to compete with the control you’ve lost, the only way to reclaim value in the music industry. If your consultants are telling you anything else, they are wrong...

It's a great history lesson as well as a sign of the times.

There may be grounds for optimism with music DRM, but I think the story will be a bit different for video. I'd still watch the next transition point, which will be when the CD dies. There'll be room to return to DRM then.

I don't count this as a sign of public awakening --  financial interest (easy stealing!) and wisdom (DRM really is bad) were too aligned in this case to support optimistic lessons.

BTW, it's kind of obvious I hope, but this is not a problem for Apple. He put his DRM-free Amazon tunes on his iPod.

The American right is dying - or not?

An optimist would call this the death throes of a dying beast ...

Shrillblog: October 2007:

... To visit Michelle Malkin's cave is to see politics at its most savage, its most ferocious, its most rageful. They say they've spent the past week smearing a child and his family because that child was fair game -- he and his family spoke of their experience receiving health care through the State Children's Health Insurance Program. For this, right wingers travel to their home, insinuate that the family is engaged in large-scale fraud, make threatening phone calls to the family, interrogate the neighbors as to the family's character and financial state.

This is the politics of hate. Screaming, sobbing, inchoate, hate. It would never, not in a million years, occur to me to drive to the home of a Republican small business owner to see if he "really" needed that tax cut. It would never, not in a million years, occur to me to call his family and demand their personal information. It would never occur to me to interrogate his neighbors. It would never occur to me to his smear his children...

A pessimist would call it the labor pains of something historically familiar.

I think it could go either way.

Waterboarding: read the comments

Recreational Waterboarding? - The Opinionator - (Suellentrop) has a quick reference to a great example of banal evil, a WSJ OpEd by Bret Stephens. Remember that name so you can stay far away from him.

It's a worthwhile quick post, but the comments hold greater value. I didn't know the US had used waterboarding torture during the Vietnam war, for example. I did know, however, than post WW II the US military considered waterboarding to be grounds for execution.

That's ok though, nobody cares.

Generation Q: Outrage is dead. Please help us ...

I "caught" Emily reading David Br__k's "Odyssey" OpEd this morning. She was lured by the intriguing title, but I didn't bite. I know exposure to Brooks causes brain damage; I ought to block his URL to protect our children.

On the other hand, Friedman, once every seven months, by purest chance, writes something non-toxic. This time he wrote about his daughter's generation (emphases mine):

Generation Q - New York Times

... Generation Q may be too quiet, too online, for its own good, and for the country’s own good. When I think of the huge budget deficit, Social Security deficit and ecological deficit that our generation is leaving this generation, if they are not spitting mad, well, then they’re just not paying attention. And we’ll just keep piling it on them.

There is a good chance that members of Generation Q will spend their entire adult lives digging out from the deficits that we — the “Greediest Generation,” epitomized by George W. Bush — are leaving them.

When I was visiting my daughter at her college, she asked me about a terrifying story that ran in this newspaper on Oct. 2, reporting that the Arctic ice cap was melting “to an extent unparalleled in a century or more” — and that the entire Arctic system appears to be “heading toward a new, more watery state” likely triggered by “human-caused global warming.”

“What happened to that Arctic story, Dad?” my daughter asked me. How could the news media just report one day that the Arctic ice was melting far faster than any models predicted “and then the story just disappeared?” Why weren’t any of the candidates talking about it? Didn’t they understand: this has become the big issue on campuses?

No, they don’t seem to understand. They seem to be too busy raising money or buying votes with subsidies for ethanol farmers in Iowa. The candidates could actually use a good kick in the pants on this point. But where is it going to come from?

Generation Q would be doing itself a favor, and America a favor, if it demanded from every candidate who comes on campus answers to three questions: What is your plan for mitigating climate change? What is your plan for reforming Social Security? What is your plan for dealing with the deficit — so we all won’t be working for China in 20 years?

America needs a jolt of the idealism, activism and outrage (it must be in there) of Generation Q. That’s what twentysomethings are for — to light a fire under the country. But they can’t e-mail it in, and an online petition or a mouse click for carbon neutrality won’t cut it. They have to get organized in a way that will force politicians to pay attention rather than just patronize them.

Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy didn’t change the world by asking people to join their Facebook crusades or to download their platforms. Activism can only be uploaded, the old-fashioned way — by young voters speaking truth to power, face to face, in big numbers, on campuses or the Washington Mall. Virtual politics is just that — virtual...

I've already written that we boomers have failed our generational test. We bear the same relationship to "Generation Q" as America does to the world; the appropriate response to our moral criticism is bitter laughter.

Still.

Someone needs to act. We know true leadership is suicidal for a 21st century American politician, leadership has to come from someone on the brighter side of 30.

Please? The world needs you. Try to shake off your Future Shock, your justifiable nihilism, and your despair. I'm on my knees now. Pretty Please?

Update: for another opinion on Mr. F's column.

Why would computerworld send me spam?

I know Conde Nast has a spam addiction, but why is Computerworld sending me marketing emails? It's a bit weird. My guess is that they use a very old fashioned email address for opt-in email, and that spam using one of my email addresses hit their opt-in list.

The reason I suspect this is that their opt-out process requires an email address to be submitted, which is also archaic.

I'm filtering all their email to the trash now, so if they want to send me a note they'll have to use the comments to this post. If they'd had a one-click embedded link opt-out I'd have given them another chance, but if they're not guilty of spam they're certainly guilty of technical incompetence. Firing offense either way.

Data mining and you: giving a damn might be wise

I do get bored returning to the same old story but I think it's a social obligation. More on how the FBI does data mining and why you should care ...(emphases mine)

Civil liberties: surveillance and privacy | Learning to live with Big Brother | Economist.com

... Two days after the attacks on New York and Washington, Frank Asher, a drug dealer turned technology entrepreneur, decided to examine the data amassed on 450m people by his private data-service company, Seisint, to see if he could identify possible terrorists. After giving each person a risk score based on name, religion, travel history, reading preferences and so on, Mr Asher came up with a list of 1,200 “suspicious” individuals, which he handed to the FBI. Unknown to him, five of the terrorist hijackers were on his list.

The FBI was impressed. Rebranded the Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange, or Matrix, Mr Asher's programme, now taken over by the FBI, could soon access 20 billion pieces of information, all of them churned and sorted and analysed to predict who might one day turn into a terrorist. A new version, called the System to Assess Risk, or STAR, has just been launched using information drawn from both private and public databases. As most of the data have already been disclosed to third parties—airline tickets, job records, car rentals and the like—they are not covered by the American constitution's Fourth Amendment, so no court warrant is required.

In an age of global terror, when governments are desperately trying to pre-empt future attacks, such profiling has become a favourite tool. But although it can predict the behaviour of large groups, this technique is “incredibly inaccurate” when it comes to individuals, says Simon Wessely, a professor of psychiatry at King's College London. Bruce Schneier, an American security guru, agrees. Mining vast amounts of data for well-established behaviour patterns, such as credit-card fraud, works very well, he says. But it is “extraordinarily unreliable” when sniffing out terrorist plots, which are uncommon and rarely have a well-defined profile.

By way of example, Mr Schneier points to the Automated Targeting System, operated by the American Customs and Border Protection, which assigns a terrorist risk-assessment score to anyone entering or leaving the United States. In 2005 some 431m people were processed. Assuming an unrealistically accurate model able to identify terrorists (and innocent people) with 99.9% accuracy, that means some 431,000 false alarms annually, all of which presumably need checking. Given the unreliability of passenger data, the real number is likely to be far higher, he says.

Those caught up in terrorist-profiling systems are not allowed to know their scores or challenge the data. Yet their profiles, which may be shared with federal, state and even foreign governments, could damage their chances of getting a state job, a student grant, a public contract or a visa. It could even prevent them from ever being able to fly again....

Ok, you can go back to sleep now.

Your "do not call" registration is expiring!

Follow Me Here reminds us we need to renew our "do not call" registration. It's hard to remember, but once upon a time telemarketers called us night and day. Then Congress passed a law that, astonishingly, worked!

I registered the first day the opt-out program became available, so I had to re-register today. You can do 3 phone calls at once, you'll get 3 confirmation emails and you need to click on each one.

Politicians and non-profits can still call, we do get those. I tell the non-profits that if they call again they'll never get a penny from me, but my wife is more forgiving. They always ask for her ...

Medical Algorithms: a web site devoted to "depression scales" and the like

I've long thought it would be interesting to have a single source for all the scales, instruments, algorithms and the like one finds in medical journals. Someone has built this source:

Medical Algorithms

...More than 11,000 Scales, Tools, Assessments, Scoring Systems, and other Algorithms useful in Medicine and Biomedical Research...

I wonder if they have any copyright issues, but they may be covered by fair use as long as they don't try to make money form the content. Most of these scales are, unfortunately, owned by the journal publishers.

Losing the roots: the Dems may have to chance a spine

I'm not yet as disgusted with the Dems as Greenwald is. Judging by the past ten years it's dangerous to assume we, the People, are thinking rationally about anything. Politicians need to, every day, calculate how rational the voter is likely to be.

On the other hand, at some point a too craven Congress risks alienating their core supporters:

Glenn Greenwald - Political Blogs and Opinions - Salon

... If the Democratic Congress capitulates yet again, there will be plenty of time and opportunity for all sorts of recriminations. I think it is quite encouraging that much of the 'netroots' is now devoting its energies and resources not to supporting Democrats, but to opposing Congressional Democrats who merit defeat.

...Matt Stoller and Open Left, for instance, are devoting most of their energies to figuring out how to surmount the obstacles to waging effective primary challenges against Bush-supporting Democrats. The fund-raising entity run by FDL, C&L and others has begun targeting worthless Democrats, funding and running robocalls against Bush-enabling Democratic incumbents in their districts (those inclined can help fund those efforts here). MoveOn is actively considering spending large sums of money to support primary challenges against war-enabling Democrats. Obviously, there is no point in working to empower Democrats who enable and support virtually all of the worst aspects of the Bush agenda...

It's a tough balancing act. I believe that the American brain is still in intensive care; the patient should be moved too quickly. Still, the loss of the core, and the inevitable return of Nader [1], requires some calculated risks. Congress may have to start resisting -- even though the American people aren't quite ready.

I wish we were a healthier People, but we're not.

[1] I think George Bush and Ralph Nader have a great deal in common. Neither has much of a learning curve, both are convinced of their righteousness. A just world would condemn them to share a house for the rest of their natural lives.