10 Types Of People

• How do I change the name of a USB stick?
• How do I mount an ISO?
• How do I automatically mount a file server at boot?

If the answer to any of these questions starts with “Open a terminal”, that is a bug. A design bug. What some people might call a Human Computer Interaction bug. You may know how to use it, and I’m sure most people reading this blog will know exactly how to do these things. The first one would probably start with “open gparted”, but ya know what…that isn’t good enough. When a normal person wants to edit the name of a USB stick they look in the file manager, they right click on it and expect to be able to click on “rename”. As far as I know, that doesn’t work in anything. It definitely doesn’t work in nautilus (and therefore Gnome) and probably won’t work in KDE or similar. This is not good. This needs fixed.

Ubuntu calls these “papercuts”, and btw, this is a fantastic project in Ubuntu. And I know half of you have now gone “oh no, another Ubuntu-ism”. Well, I don’t care what you think about the name. The name isn’t the important thing. What is important is the concept. These are design issues that we need to solve, and they are not being solved in any way.

I think it stems from a fundamental problem with a lot of Linux users. You don’t want “normal” people on Linux. You are quite happy with having it all to yourselves. Well ya know what, if you really like choice like you say you do, we need to work on these problems. If you want normal people to take you seriously when we think about these things, these need sorted.

This is why I am calling for distributions and programs to take a cycle out from implementing new features. Ya know what, things happen so fast, we can afford for 6 months – 1 year to get rid of a lot of these issues. The main reason I think we should do it now? Windows 8 is going to be a big disaster. I can feel it. I can already feel the venom coming out of people about metro, and the fact that the desktop on Windows is probably going to be a second class citizen.

What are these people going to do? Are they going to continue using XP or 7? Well, some may continue to use 7, and a few will use XP (although hopefully that will decrease rapidly), but we need to offer an alternative. Some will go to osX, but what about the serious users who realise the need for change, but don’t want an operating system that doesn’t function like a traditional desktop in any way? They know osX is going that way as well. We need to be that other desktop. The choice we offer is huge and means there will always be a stable, functional, supported desktop that they will like in some way. But they won’t come if we have these horrible issues.

**EDIT** Some people seem to be missing the point. This is not about these specific issues, so please don’t give me solutions for them. The point is the overarching issue of design problems that we quite often ignore as geeks. **EDIT**

That is all I have to say now, apart from the fact that there are other issues with Linux. I hope to focus on some of them in the future, such as the stupid way some things are organised in the filesystem (just try and find that executable for that program please, or that specific library…oh its in /lib? /usr/lib? /usr/local/lib? /usr/share/lib? /usr/local/share/lib? …?????) and the pathetic attitudes of some people in the communities that give our great fantastic people a really bad name.

How do I change the name of a USB stick? How do I mount an ISO? How do I automatically mount a file server at boot? If the answer to any of these questions starts with "Open a terminal", that is a bug. A design bug. What some people might call a Human Computer Interaction bug. You may know how to use it, and I'm sure most people reading this blog will know exactly how to do these things. The first one would probably start with "open gparted", but ya know what...that isn't good enough. When a normal person wants to edit the name of a USB stick they look in the file manager, they right click on it and expect to be able to click on "rename". As far as I know, that doesn't work in anything. It definitely doesn't work in nautilus (and therefore Gnome) and probably won't work in KDE or similar. This is not good. This needs fixed. Ubuntu calls these "papercuts", and btw, this is a fantastic project in Ubuntu. And I know half of you have now gone "oh no, another Ubuntu-ism". Well, I don't care what you think about the name. The name isn't the important thing. What is important is the concept. These are design issues that we need to solve, and they are not being solved in any way. I think it stems from a fundamental problem with a lot of Linux users. You don't want "normal" people on Linux. You are quite happy with having it all to yourselves. Well ya know what, if you really like choice like you say you do, we need to work on these problems. If you want normal people to take you seriously when we think about these things, these need sorted.   This is why I am calling for distributions and programs to take a cycle out from implementing new features. Ya know what, things happen so fast, we can afford for 6 months - 1 year to get rid of a lot of these issues. The main reason I think we should do it now? Windows 8 is going to be a big disaster. I can feel it. I can already feel the venom coming out of people about metro, and the fact that the desktop on Windows is probably going to be a second class citizen. What are these people going to do? Are they going to continue using XP or 7? Well, some may continue to use 7, and a few will use XP (although hopefully that will decrease rapidly), but we need to offer an alternative. Some will go to osX, but what about the serious users who realise the need for change, but don't want an operating system that doesn't function like a traditional desktop in any way? They know osX is going that way as well. We need to be that other desktop. The choice we offer is huge and means there will always be a stable, functional, supported desktop that they will like in some way. But they won't come if we have these horrible issues. **EDIT** Some people seem to be missing the point. This is not about these specific issues, so please don't give me solutions for them. The point is the overarching issue of design problems that we quite often ignore as geeks. **EDIT** That is all I have to say now, apart from the fact that there are other issues with Linux. I hope to focus on some of them in the future, such as the stupid way some things are organised in the filesystem (just try and find that executable for that program please, or that specific library...oh its in /lib? /usr/lib? /usr/local/lib? /usr/share/lib? /usr/local/share/lib? ...?????) and the pathetic attitudes of some people in the communities that give our great fantastic people a really bad name.

Stop Online Piracy Act, Protect IP Act, Digital Economies Act.

All sound like good things, don’t they? You’d have to be a pirate, thief or criminal of some sort to oppose one of these things yeah?

Of course you would. Or, that’s what we are told. You can’t oppose this legislation, it protects people. That is what we are told time and time again. Well, we shall not fall for that. We shall not be bullied into agreeing with your crappy rules that make no sense.

In America, there is a big fight happening about the SOPA and PIPA legislations that are trying to be pushed through into law. And last year, in Britain, the DEAct was pushed through in the run up to the 2010 General Election. We are told that these will protect jobs. They will protect legitimate jobs, and punish those who do wrong. Now, there are 2 main issues here:

• Piracy costs money and jobs

This is the second issue people normally come to when we come across this issue, but IMO, it is the main one. There are a number of people who pirate things

1. Those who can’t afford.
2. Those who don’t want to pay because they feel entitled to content.
3. Those who are against the “man”.
4. Those who can afford but want to try it out first.

For both 2 and 3, these people will never pay. If they didn’t get the things illegally, they wouldn’t pay. They never will. There is no point in fighting these people because either they will continue to get your stuff or they won’t. Lost causes, all of them. And yeah, I agree that these people are doing wrong things. But theres no point. Such a waste of time and money.

For 1, the only way to solve this is by giving them more money. So stop wasting money on ridiculous bills like this.

For number 4, they are the people who spend more money on content than people who don’t pirate. They already give you loads of money, and they aren’t going to give you more if they can’t get their tasters. They might even spend less.

So, basically…I don’t believe that piracy costs money or jobs. If you can prove that people would buy it if they can’t get it illegally, then I’ll retract my statement. But I think its rubbish.

• We have to break the internet

This is the other issue. Which, to be honest, is kinda moot after my last statement. But even if you do take the stance that it needs to be stopped, for goodness sake think about this properly. This is whack-a-mole. You can’t get rid of these sites by breaking DNS (and no matter what Lamar Smith says, this is breaking DNS) at all. You have to go after the route cause. Most films are pirated before they are even released in the cinema. How does this happen? Inside jobs. Go after your own people for goodness sake.

I’m a man with a website that has copyrighted material. My domain disappears. What happens? Most of my clients are clever enough to find ways around it. And if they aren’t, well…I set up another domain, or I tell people an IP address to get to. Etc etc. They are probably all following me on twitter, Facebook, google+, identica, etc. Think you can stop this by taking domains off the internet? Really? In that case you are insane.

In summary…there is no need to do this, and even if there is, this is the wrong way to go. For goodness sake, spend all that money you are spending this on important things. The American government could spend the money on getting rid of their TRILLION DOLLARS OF DEBT. And the industries could spend the money on making better films? Or maybe helping people who are starving in this world while you are worrying about a few 15-year-old getting a free copy of your film. Boo hoo for you.

My main point is, stop with these Bill names that are a way of saying “This is good, no matter what it says, if you oppose it you are a criminal.” I’m fed up of it.

Stop Online Piracy Act, Protect IP Act, Digital Economies Act. All sound like good things, don't they? You'd have to be a pirate, thief or criminal of some sort to oppose one of these things yeah? Of course you would. Or, that's what we are told. You can't oppose this legislation, it protects people. That is what we are told time and time again. Well, we shall not fall for that. We shall not be bullied into agreeing with your crappy rules that make no sense. In America, there is a big fight happening about the SOPA and PIPA legislations that are trying to be pushed through into law. And last year, in Britain, the DEAct was pushed through in the run up to the 2010 General Election. We are told that these will protect jobs. They will protect legitimate jobs, and punish those who do wrong. Now, there are 2 main issues here: Piracy costs money and jobs This is the second issue people normally come to when we come across this issue, but IMO, it is the main one. There are a number of people who pirate things Those who can't afford. Those who don't want to pay because they feel entitled to content. Those who are against the "man". Those who can afford but want to try it out first. For both 2 and 3, these people will never pay. If they didn't get the things illegally, they wouldn't pay. They never will. There is no point in fighting these people because either they will continue to get your stuff or they won't. Lost causes, all of them. And yeah, I agree that these people are doing wrong things. But theres no point. Such a waste of time and money. For 1, the only way to solve this is by giving them more money. So stop wasting money on ridiculous bills like this. For number 4, they are the people who spend more money on content than people who don't pirate. They already give you loads of money, and they aren't going to give you more if they can't get their tasters. They might even spend less.   So, basically...I don't believe that piracy costs money or jobs. If you can prove that people would buy it if they can't get it illegally, then I'll retract my statement. But I think its rubbish. We have to break the internet This is the other issue. Which, to be honest, is kinda moot after my last statement. But even if you do take the stance that it needs to be stopped, for goodness sake think about this properly. This is whack-a-mole. You can't get rid of these sites by breaking DNS (and no matter what Lamar Smith says, this is breaking DNS) at all. You have to go after the route cause. Most films are pirated before they are even released in the cinema. How does this happen? Inside jobs. Go after your own people for goodness sake. I'm a man with a website that has copyrighted material. My domain disappears. What happens? Most of my clients are clever enough to find ways around it. And if they aren't, well...I set up another domain, or I tell people an IP address to get to. Etc etc. They are probably all following me on twitter, Facebook, google+, identica, etc. Think you can stop this by taking domains off the internet? Really? In that case you are insane.   In summary...there is no need to do this, and even if there is, this is the wrong way to go. For goodness sake, spend all that money you are spending this on important things. The American government could spend the money on getting rid of their TRILLION DOLLARS OF DEBT. And the industries could spend the money on making better films? Or maybe helping people who are starving in this world while you are worrying about a few 15-year-old getting a free copy of your film. Boo hoo for you. My main point is, stop with these Bill names that are a way of saying "This is good, no matter what it says, if you oppose it you are a criminal." I'm fed up of it.

You may have heard that Sony’s lawsuit against GeoHot and failoverflow was made official today (although, we knew it was coming when they took out that restraining order, lets be honest). If you don’t know whats happened, let me explain in layman’s terms. Essentially, to run any game or program on a PS3, it must be “signed” with a private key, which is essentially a long string of characters that encrypts the game or program. Then, each console has its own key, which is similar, and can be used to decrypt the game, therefore proving it is an official game. The reason that no one has managed to run anything on a PS3 before last week is because no one had this key, as it was kept in a secure Sony facility.

However (and this is where my knowledge of what exactly happened gets a bit sketchy), a group called failoverflow managed to figure out how to do something with the PS3′s key system, and then the next week, GeoHot (a famous iOS and PS3 hacker) managed to use the same method to figure out the master private key. This would theoretically allow anyone to install whatever they want on their PS3, therefore leading to the inevitable end of people finally getting Linux back on their PS3s (which, btw, we paid for in the first place). This is fantastic news for people like me (hackers and computer scientists) because it means we can use our consoles to the full potential. The cell processor can do a lot more than people are doing just now with games and stuff, and this is great. Geohot actually posted a video showing him running a homebrew program on his PS3.

However, today, Sony filed a lawsuit against Geohot and the members of failoverflow, basically suing the living daylights out of them. Apart from my anger towards Sony, there are a few things we can take from this:

1. This is a permanent hack – if Sony could fix this with a software update, they would. They didn’t bother trying to sue GeoHot when they could fix what he did with a software update, therefore they are screwed with this. There is nothing they can do, so they decide to sue.
2. They are obviously not releasing the PS4 anytime soon. This lawsuit will cost them time and money, and if they were going to be announcing the PS4 in June at E3, then they wouldn’t go to all this expense and bother.

Now, before you start harping on about software piracy, this is nothing to do with that. Yes, sure, some people will use it to clone games, but you can’t get away from that fact, and I don’t care, because thats not what I, and most people, want to do with this software. I want to install linux, I want to write small programs for my PS3, and I want to be able to play indie games, and have random little Open Source programs that people make for it. This is what I want, not to rip games and play them without buying them. Most of us aren’t like that. The people involved with this hack want openness and want to be able to use their consoles to the full potential that they can. Nothing more.

Do you stop something because someone might use it for bad? No. Unless the majority uses it for bad, then you just deal with individual people. You don’t ban cars because occasionally people use them to run people down deliberately. And this isn’t even killing anyone if people do it.

I am not for piracy, I am for openness and being able to use my console to its full potential, and in 1 case actually being able to use 1 of the features I bought with it (linux support) which Sony took away. Ironically, to stop this happening

1 last point…I just hope that Apple’s jailbreaking case loss is enough within case law to warrant this being legal as well. If you look at the list of laws that are supposodly broken with this, it seems to be a load of rubbish. I’m obviously not a lawyer, but I’m sure using my PS3 for what I want does not count as “accessing computers without authorization”. Erm, its my computer…

The worry for me, is that if Sony wins, then suddenly we have Apple, and many other companies, trying to stop us using our computers and phones fully. I hacked the bootloader on my phone so I could run modified software on it. I’m not breaking any laws, so why shouldn’t I be able to do that? Its pretty much the same issue.

P.s – The PS3 logo is a registered trademark of Sony…blah blah blah…you know the drill, right?

You may have heard that Sony's lawsuit against GeoHot and failoverflow was made official today (although, we knew it was coming when they took out that restraining order, lets be honest). If you don't know whats happened, let me explain in layman's terms. Essentially, to run any game or program on a PS3, it must be "signed" with a private key, which is essentially a long string of characters that encrypts the game or program. Then, each console has its own key, which is similar, and can be used to decrypt the game, therefore proving it is an official game. The reason that no one has managed to run anything on a PS3 before last week is because no one had this key, as it was kept in a secure Sony facility. However (and this is where my knowledge of what exactly happened gets a bit sketchy), a group called failoverflow managed to figure out how to do something with the PS3's key system, and then the next week, GeoHot (a famous iOS and PS3 hacker) managed to use the same method to figure out the master private key. This would theoretically allow anyone to install whatever they want on their PS3, therefore leading to the inevitable end of people finally getting Linux back on their PS3s (which, btw, we paid for in the first place). This is fantastic news for people like me (hackers and computer scientists) because it means we can use our consoles to the full potential. The cell processor can do a lot more than people are doing just now with games and stuff, and this is great. Geohot actually posted a video showing him running a homebrew program on his PS3. However, today, Sony filed a lawsuit against Geohot and the members of failoverflow, basically suing the living daylights out of them. Apart from my anger towards Sony, there are a few things we can take from this: This is a permanent hack - if Sony could fix this with a software update, they would. They didn't bother trying to sue GeoHot when they could fix what he did with a software update, therefore they are screwed with this. There is nothing they can do, so they decide to sue. They are obviously not releasing the PS4 anytime soon. This lawsuit will cost them time and money, and if they were going to be announcing the PS4 in June at E3, then they wouldn't go to all this expense and bother. Now, before you start harping on about software piracy, this is nothing to do with that. Yes, sure, some people will use it to clone games, but you can't get away from that fact, and I don't care, because thats not what I, and most people, want to do with this software. I want to install linux, I want to write small programs for my PS3, and I want to be able to play indie games, and have random little Open Source programs that people make for it. This is what I want, not to rip games and play them without buying them. Most of us aren't like that. The people involved with this hack want openness and want to be able to use their consoles to the full potential that they can. Nothing more. Do you stop something because someone might use it for bad? No. Unless the majority uses it for bad, then you just deal with individual people. You don't ban cars because occasionally people use them to run people down deliberately. And this isn't even killing anyone if people do it. I am not for piracy, I am for openness and being able to use my console to its full potential, and in 1 case actually being able to use 1 of the features I bought with it (linux support) which Sony took away. Ironically, to stop this happening :-P 1 last point...I just hope that Apple's jailbreaking case loss is enough within case law to warrant this being legal as well. If you look at the list of laws that are supposodly broken with this, it seems to be a load of rubbish. I'm obviously not a lawyer, but I'm sure using my PS3 for what I want does not count as "accessing computers without authorization". Erm, its my computer... The worry for me, is that if Sony wins, then suddenly we have Apple, and many other companies, trying to stop us using our computers and phones fully. I hacked the bootloader on my phone so I could run modified software on it. I'm not breaking any laws, so why shouldn't I be able to do that? Its pretty much the same issue. P.s - The PS3 logo is a registered trademark of Sony...blah blah blah...you know the drill, right?

Surprise! This is a surprise Video of the Week (it is no ordinary one). It doesn’t have that in the title, that should be your clue! Your second clue should be the song reference in the title…10 points to anyone who has guessed it already. Don’t look down!! Thats cheating. Ach well, noone gets points because you have probably already looked down.

Anyway, lets talk a little about the XFactor before I give you the video (this is what makes it special). Many of you will remember the RATM campaign last year, to take XFactor off the top of the charts. I remember when I was younger, the Christmas number1 was a great time of unknown. Who would become the Christmas number1? Nowadays, we know who it will be the week beforehand, when the xfactor winner is announced. This is a horrible way for the Christmas no1 to have turned out to be. Yet, the campaign last year did nothing to help it. Still, there are no real challengers to the xfactor winner (whoever that might be, I really don’t care, and please don’t tell me…)

So, this is why I am supporting the campaign to get Surfin’ Bird by the Trashmen to Christmas number 1, by buying the single next week (anytime starting 00:00 tonight, until 23:59 next Saturday).

It is, in my opinion, an equally apt song to have for this campaign as Rage Against the Machine’s was last year. The Trashmen revolutionised the music industry in just a few short minutes. It did, however, never reach its true potential in the charts, only reaching number 5 in the UK, and number 4 in the US. It has spawned several cover songs, and a huge following of young people since its inclusion in the seventh season of Family Guy.

It is one of those songs that changed history, and it’ll hopefully do it again.

RATM got 500,000 downloads last year, which made it to number 1. The Facebook group for this campaign has over 600,000 followers so far. If everyone on that page buys it, it is a sinch. But you too can help.

And just incase you aren’t sure, you can also donate to charity through this. Money from this campaign is going towards primarily the RSPB, but also to the British Heart Foundation, and the Pink Ribbon Foundation. But don’t let this be a 1 off charity thing, let it stir you to give to charities regularly. Charities do great work, and any charity that supports this deserves some money…

Whats that you say? You want the video? Ok…enjoy members of RSPB dancing to this fantastic song!

Ba ba ba bird bird bird…bird is the…word?

Facebook group (incase you missed it up there ^^^): http://www.facebook.com/birdbirdbirdistheword

Surprise! This is a surprise Video of the Week (it is no ordinary one). It doesn't have that in the title, that should be your clue! Your second clue should be the song reference in the title...10 points to anyone who has guessed it already. Don't look down!! Thats cheating. Ach well, noone gets points because you have probably already looked down. Anyway, lets talk a little about the XFactor before I give you the video (this is what makes it special). Many of you will remember the RATM campaign last year, to take XFactor off the top of the charts. I remember when I was younger, the Christmas number1 was a great time of unknown. Who would become the Christmas number1? Nowadays, we know who it will be the week beforehand, when the xfactor winner is announced. This is a horrible way for the Christmas no1 to have turned out to be. Yet, the campaign last year did nothing to help it. Still, there are no real challengers to the xfactor winner (whoever that might be, I really don't care, and please don't tell me...) So, this is why I am supporting the campaign to get Surfin' Bird by the Trashmen to Christmas number 1, by buying the single next week (anytime starting 00:00 tonight, until 23:59 next Saturday). It is, in my opinion, an equally apt song to have for this campaign as Rage Against the Machine's was last year. The Trashmen revolutionised the music industry in just a few short minutes. It did, however, never reach its true potential in the charts, only reaching number 5 in the UK, and number 4 in the US. It has spawned several cover songs, and a huge following of young people since its inclusion in the seventh season of Family Guy. It is one of those songs that changed history, and it'll hopefully do it again. RATM got 500,000 downloads last year, which made it to number 1. The Facebook group for this campaign has over 600,000 followers so far. If everyone on that page buys it, it is a sinch. But you too can help. And just incase you aren't sure, you can also donate to charity through this. Money from this campaign is going towards primarily the RSPB, but also to the British Heart Foundation, and the Pink Ribbon Foundation. But don't let this be a 1 off charity thing, let it stir you to give to charities regularly. Charities do great work, and any charity that supports this deserves some money... Whats that you say? You want the video? Ok...enjoy members of RSPB dancing to this fantastic song! [vimeo 17596178] Ba ba ba bird bird bird...bird is the...word? Facebook group (incase you missed it up there ^^^): http://www.facebook.com/birdbirdbirdistheword

I understand that the Google people have many more important things to be doing, but personally I feel this is part of Google’s problem. I have been trying to find out about the “history” of android. About when previous android releases were announced, and the source code was released, the gaps between them, and trying to figure out when we could possibly see 2.3/3.0 because of that. I know this isn’t a science, but it is fun anyway.

As far as I can see, there is no “History” page, and the only page dedicated to android releases hasn’t been updated since 1.5 (android.com/releases). The easiest way for me to find this information is using wikipedia:

1.0: 21/10/2008

1.1: 09/02/2009

1.5: 30/04/2009

1.6: 15/09/2009

2.0: 26/10/2009

2.1: 12/01/2010

2.2: 20/05/2010

By my calculations, this would set 2.3 to be released …goodness knows. There seems to be no pattern at all. Thats rubbish. It should be between tomorrow and january.

This is not the point of this post however, the point is that Google need to keep their webpages up to date. Need to have a “history of android” page or something. But noone at Google would ever think about this as they are a company of engineers, as many people have said before.

This is Google’s main problem, thinking about the normal things, the simple things, the little things.

I understand that the Google people have many more important things to be doing, but personally I feel this is part of Google's problem. I have been trying to find out about the "history" of android. About when previous android releases were announced, and the source code was released, the gaps between them, and trying to figure out when we could possibly see 2.3/3.0 because of that. I know this isn't a science, but it is fun anyway. As far as I can see, there is no "History" page, and the only page dedicated to android releases hasn't been updated since 1.5 (android.com/releases). The easiest way for me to find this information is using wikipedia: 1.0: 21/10/2008 1.1: 09/02/2009 1.5: 30/04/2009 1.6: 15/09/2009 2.0: 26/10/2009 2.1: 12/01/2010 2.2: 20/05/2010 By my calculations, this would set 2.3 to be released ...goodness knows. There seems to be no pattern at all. Thats rubbish. It should be between tomorrow and january. This is not the point of this post however, the point is that Google need to keep their webpages up to date. Need to have a "history of android" page or something. But noone at Google would ever think about this as they are a company of engineers, as many people have said before. This is Google's main problem, thinking about the normal things, the simple things, the little things.

Or “Why backdoors are bad things.”

Heard of the US government saying they want backdoors into web applications? All in the name of terrorism…sorry, in the name of fighting terrorism. It is so they can get access to data that they “need” to stop people blowing other people up. Ok…sure. Lets have a think of a few points about this:

• People who look for backdoors

Lets think about this, people are always looking for backdoors in web apps. And they are always there, because no code is perfect. It is quite hard however when noone knows about it. And when it is found, it can be fixed and will not happen again. So, although they will happen, they can be fixed, if a backdoor is in it for the US, do you think Google (for example) will close that backdoor to then open another one? No, they won’t.

• Documentation

If the government want these backdoors, they will want written documentation about how to access information through these doors. Now, we all know that the government are rubbish at keeping information secret (for one thing). They lose information on laptops, cds, usb sticks, the internet all the time. I don’t want information about how to access my private data being lost on a train. Not a good idea.

Also, what about Freedom of Information? If the government has inforamation, and someone asks for that information, they have to release it. (And then, of course, they will put it on wikileaks). I’m not sure if that is true in America, but certanarily if America has the info, Britain will get it as well. They are “allies” afterall, aren’t they? So, let us get the information freed!!! Let the whole world know how to get into my email…

• Terrorists aren’t that stupid…

If terrorists are stupid enough to communicate over big web apps, there is no way they will manage to bomb anyone anyway. They are normally cleverer than that. They don’t email each other, or put up a shared evernote note on when their attacks are going to happen. No. They will create encrypted sites that only they have access to, which is not a big web app, is homegrown, and won’t have any backdoors into it. And how are they going to get into that then?

Essentially, like every other policy that governments say, this  has not been thought through, and is just going to cause more and more security flaws in web apps that normal people use, and our data is going to get stolen. It WILL NOT stop terrorists from doing what they are doing.

Or "Why backdoors are bad things." Heard of the US government saying they want backdoors into web applications? All in the name of terrorism...sorry, in the name of fighting terrorism. It is so they can get access to data that they "need" to stop people blowing other people up. Ok...sure. Lets have a think of a few points about this: People who look for backdoors Lets think about this, people are always looking for backdoors in web apps. And they are always there, because no code is perfect. It is quite hard however when noone knows about it. And when it is found, it can be fixed and will not happen again. So, although they will happen, they can be fixed, if a backdoor is in it for the US, do you think Google (for example) will close that backdoor to then open another one? No, they won't. Documentation If the government want these backdoors, they will want written documentation about how to access information through these doors. Now, we all know that the government are rubbish at keeping information secret (for one thing). They lose information on laptops, cds, usb sticks, the internet all the time. I don't want information about how to access my private data being lost on a train. Not a good idea. Also, what about Freedom of Information? If the government has inforamation, and someone asks for that information, they have to release it. (And then, of course, they will put it on wikileaks). I'm not sure if that is true in America, but certanarily if America has the info, Britain will get it as well. They are "allies" afterall, aren't they? So, let us get the information freed!!! Let the whole world know how to get into my email... Terrorists aren't that stupid... If terrorists are stupid enough to communicate over big web apps, there is no way they will manage to bomb anyone anyway. They are normally cleverer than that. They don't email each other, or put up a shared evernote note on when their attacks are going to happen. No. They will create encrypted sites that only they have access to, which is not a big web app, is homegrown, and won't have any backdoors into it. And how are they going to get into that then? Essentially, like every other policy that governments say, this  has not been thought through, and is just going to cause more and more security flaws in web apps that normal people use, and our data is going to get stolen. It WILL NOT stop terrorists from doing what they are doing.

How many times have you heard the phrase “No, its a security risk.” when you ask if it is possible to implement a new feature into something that you use but aren’t a developer of (or possibly you aren’t a developer yourself). Well, frankly this is a blog post asking people to stop doing this. If you don’t want to put this feature in, just tell us, if you don’t think it is possible, let us know, if you can’t be bothered listening to us, please just tell us.

The phrase “Its a security risk” is overused and frankly it stops it meaning anything when it needs to mean something. The phrase should be used only when something is actually a security risk.

For example, I asked for openID to be implemented into a web service I use (it isn’t a public one, and I’m not going to oust the “developer” because that would be pretty horrible), and that was met with the reply “No, never going to happen. It’s a security risk.”. The forum topic was then deleted (because me saying that the site ran joomla was also a security risk) and that was the end of that.

Now, although there have been security problems with openID and how it works, but there are security problems with absolutely everything we do. If you won’t do anything if it is a “security risk” then don’t get into IT. Everything is a security risk, and we need to understand that. I’m not saying we should implement everything willy nilly, but lets not be so pathetic. The same IT person who thought openID was a security risk uses windows…what else do I need to say?

If you are a developer, let me challenge you. Try not to say “Its a security risk.”. If you honestly have security concerns that is fine, but if not, let the person know exactly why you don’t want to implement it, even if it is something as simple as “I don’t want that feature.” That is more honest. I can’t stand lies…

How many times have you heard the phrase "No, its a security risk." when you ask if it is possible to implement a new feature into something that you use but aren't a developer of (or possibly you aren't a developer yourself). Well, frankly this is a blog post asking people to stop doing this. If you don't want to put this feature in, just tell us, if you don't think it is possible, let us know, if you can't be bothered listening to us, please just tell us. The phrase "Its a security risk" is overused and frankly it stops it meaning anything when it needs to mean something. The phrase should be used only when something is actually a security risk. For example, I asked for openID to be implemented into a web service I use (it isn't a public one, and I'm not going to oust the "developer" because that would be pretty horrible), and that was met with the reply "No, never going to happen. It's a security risk.". The forum topic was then deleted (because me saying that the site ran joomla was also a security risk) and that was the end of that. Now, although there have been security problems with openID and how it works, but there are security problems with absolutely everything we do. If you won't do anything if it is a "security risk" then don't get into IT. Everything is a security risk, and we need to understand that. I'm not saying we should implement everything willy nilly, but lets not be so pathetic. The same IT person who thought openID was a security risk uses windows...what else do I need to say? If you are a developer, let me challenge you. Try not to say "Its a security risk.". If you honestly have security concerns that is fine, but if not, let the person know exactly why you don't want to implement it, even if it is something as simple as "I don't want that feature." That is more honest. I can't stand lies...

So, I sent an email to Jim Murphy, my MP (although technically he isn’t my MP just now as parliament has been dissolved, and that must take a lot of hot water…) about the Digital Economies Bill (now the Digital Economies Act). Yesterday, I got a reply from him by letter (yes…letter), nearly 3 weeks after I sent him the original email. There is obviously no point in writing to him again until after the election (and if he actually gets back in the seat, which I hope he doesn’t), so I thought I would post about it here. I scanned it in, and if you click on the small copy of the image, you will be able to see it in all of its large, scanned glory.

Take the jump to see extracts of it, and my opinions on what he wrote to me.

**UPDATE** Image changed due to information that needed to be blurred out #fail **UPDATE**

(more…)

So, I sent an email to Jim Murphy, my MP (although technically he isn't my MP just now as parliament has been dissolved, and that must take a lot of hot water...) about the Digital Economies Bill (now the Digital Economies Act). Yesterday, I got a reply from him by letter (yes...letter), nearly 3 weeks after I sent him the original email. There is obviously no point in writing to him again until after the election (and if he actually gets back in the seat, which I hope he doesn't), so I thought I would post about it here. I scanned it in, and if you click on the small copy of the image, you will be able to see it in all of its large, scanned glory. Take the jump to see extracts of it, and my opinions on what he wrote to me. **UPDATE** Image changed due to information that needed to be blurred out #fail **UPDATE** Thank you for contacting me recently about the Digital Economies Bill. I understand your concerns regarding this Bill however I do not agree that this important piece of legislation has been rushed through Parliament as all stages of the legislative process have been adhered to. Ok, so he is saying this wasn't rushed? A Bill that was pushed through by unelected members of parliament, that had a 3 hour debate in which loads of members stood up and spoke against it, and actively said that the Bill was being rushed through parliament, had just over 200 people voting on it (and many more less actually attending the debate), which Jim Murphy himself didn't even turn up or vote on it, over 20000 people who wrote to their MPs were effectively ignored and people asking important things in the debate were told not to ask them by the Speaker. Ok, yeah, you are right, Jim, this wasn't rushed through. Or not. As you may know before this Bill was passed the UK copyright framework was 300 years old therefore we needed to introduce measures to bring this up to date. And here we have the only sensible thing he has said. We do need to reform copyright, but this is not the way it should be done. I understand that you are concerned in particular about the measures intended to tackle online infringements of copyright. Actually, no. I made at least 3 points in my original letter to him and only 1 of them was about the 3 strikes law. Yes, that point was larger than the other 2, but that wasn't because I was worried about it more, it was because there were more things that I could say about it. The UK Government believes that Internet Service Providers should play a role in helping to make online infringment a less attractive option. Well, first of all, maybe you should do something that UK ISPs are actually happy with. Second of all, maybe you should realise that the 3 strikes law, which was actually put down in several countries, increased piracy in France. A law should be there to stop people doing something, and if it isn't doing that, there is no point in it. It won't stop piracy. Rights holders would have to apply for a court order to get access to the name and address of serious repeat infringers in order to prioritise legal action against them. Ok, well, this is new. Last time I looked it didn't have this. It is a little bit of an improvement, but not enough to make it a good idea. They also don't realise that it isn't that easy for ISPs to do this. There are so many technical loopholes. There are a few problems with this letter, and the bill in general: He doesn't mention anything about the issues with free wifi. He doesn't mention anything about the issues with blocking websites. Reading through this summary of the debill, almost everything is basically copied from this and thrown into a letter together. No matter what he says, this was totally rushed through parliament This shows a complete lack of understanding of the technical implications. I don't have to highlight anymore of the issues with the Digital Economies Bill because you can read them in my letter, and in countless things written by other people and magazines. (Note the guardian, new scientist and talk talk articles)

Ok, now this issue has been running around the blogosphere for a while, so I’m going to post my thoughts on it. You may have seen my thoughts on other services, and they are part of what I’m thinking, but i didn’t express them very well, so please take this as my official stance on the issue.

Let me first get the facts right. If I don’t have this right, then please let me know. I believe that Ubuntu is dropping the GIMP because it is not needed, and they are keeping f-spot as it is a photo “editor” as well as manager. Ok…

This is how this blog post will be structured…

1. F-spot is rubbish.
2. Mono is huge
3. Gimp is not necessarily needed, but we need a replacement
4. Summary

F-spot is rubbish
Ok, who uses f-spot? Not me. Not my previously-linux-using girlfriend who is a photographer. Not any photographer I know. Not any linux-user that I know. This bit is not an anti-mono rant. I have nothing against mono, I use it myself. This is an f-spot rant.

F-spot is a chunky, horrible looking application, which promises lots of things and then doesn’t deliver a single thing. It messes with photos, where they are stored, their meta-data and in one case actually resized a whole bunch of my gfs photos, and deleted some. We had a backup for some, but not all, of the photos. Yes, I know, we should keep backups, but we didn’t for once, and ended up losing some.

I challenge 1 person to use f-spot for 2 weeks, and then come and tell me it is a good application. It isn’t. It is also not a photo-editor. I mean, seriously, what sort of photo editing would you do with f-spot? I wouldn’t…

Mono is huge

Name 1 application that uses mono in the default Ubuntu install. f-spot. Anymore? No. None. Banshee never ended up in the default install, did it? No. They took it out.

So, my point is…f-spot is a crap application, take it out, and then you have a huge amount of free space on the Ubuntu cd. Is that not the reason they want to take GIMP out? Space saving? Yeah…so get rid of mono.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying mono is rubbish and we shouldn’t use it. I do use mono. Only for one application, but still. I can only think of 1 application that uses mono that is actually any good. Gnome-do. And seeing as Ubuntu won’t include that in the default install, we should get rid of it.

Some people say it can be used for porting apps to linux from .net. But it hasn’t. It would be a fantastic thing to do that, but it hasn’t been used for ANY app to port over yet. So why are we including such a huge thing in the default install?

Gimp is not necessarily needed, but we need a replacement

I’ll be honest with you, I uninstall GIMP as soon as I install Ubuntu. Because I don’t use it. I think it is a fantastic application, it is massively amazing and very important for the FLOSS community.

My question, however, is whether or not it should be in the default install of Ubuntu. I am of the opinion that it is very very complex and far too big and complex for the majority of computer users. Most people won’t really want a huge photo editor in their install, and if someone does, its really not hard to install it.

What I think we need is a replacement for GIMP in the default install, but make it really easy to install it. Well, we don’t need to make it really easy to install…it already it. “sudo apt-get install gimp” or go to the software centre, find gimp and click on install.

So the question is, what should we replace it with? Gthumb? Xpaint? I’ll be honest with you, i’ve never used them. I don’t do photos. If there is no replacement for gimp that is good, then don’t get rid of it. But we need a sort of “paint-style” app for ubuntu that will do simple stuff, like cropping, resizing, rotating, simple drawing (squares, circles) and then everyone is happy.

Conclusion

F-spot is crap. Get rid of it.

Now that f-spot is out, get rid of mono. Its a space hogger.

Get rid of gimp, and replace it with a “paint-style” app.

Ok, now this issue has been running around the blogosphere for a while, so I'm going to post my thoughts on it. You may have seen my thoughts on other services, and they are part of what I'm thinking, but i didn't express them very well, so please take this as my official stance on the issue. Let me first get the facts right. If I don't have this right, then please let me know. I believe that Ubuntu is dropping the GIMP because it is not needed, and they are keeping f-spot as it is a photo "editor" as well as manager. Ok... This is how this blog post will be structured... F-spot is rubbish. Mono is huge Gimp is not necessarily needed, but we need a replacement Summary F-spot is rubbish Ok, who uses f-spot? Not me. Not my previously-linux-using girlfriend who is a photographer. Not any photographer I know. Not any linux-user that I know. This bit is not an anti-mono rant. I have nothing against mono, I use it myself. This is an f-spot rant. F-spot is a chunky, horrible looking application, which promises lots of things and then doesn't deliver a single thing. It messes with photos, where they are stored, their meta-data and in one case actually resized a whole bunch of my gfs photos, and deleted some. We had a backup for some, but not all, of the photos. Yes, I know, we should keep backups, but we didn't for once, and ended up losing some. I challenge 1 person to use f-spot for 2 weeks, and then come and tell me it is a good application. It isn't. It is also not a photo-editor. I mean, seriously, what sort of photo editing would you do with f-spot? I wouldn't... Mono is huge Name 1 application that uses mono in the default Ubuntu install. f-spot. Anymore? No. None. Banshee never ended up in the default install, did it? No. They took it out. So, my point is...f-spot is a crap application, take it out, and then you have a huge amount of free space on the Ubuntu cd. Is that not the reason they want to take GIMP out? Space saving? Yeah...so get rid of mono. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying mono is rubbish and we shouldn't use it. I do use mono. Only for one application, but still. I can only think of 1 application that uses mono that is actually any good. Gnome-do. And seeing as Ubuntu won't include that in the default install, we should get rid of it. Some people say it can be used for porting apps to linux from .net. But it hasn't. It would be a fantastic thing to do that, but it hasn't been used for ANY app to port over yet. So why are we including such a huge thing in the default install? Gimp is not necessarily needed, but we need a replacement I'll be honest with you, I uninstall GIMP as soon as I install Ubuntu. Because I don't use it. I think it is a fantastic application, it is massively amazing and very important for the FLOSS community. My question, however, is whether or not it should be in the default install of Ubuntu. I am of the opinion that it is very very complex and far too big and complex for the majority of computer users. Most people won't really want a huge photo editor in their install, and if someone does, its really not hard to install it. What I think we need is a replacement for GIMP in the default install, but make it really easy to install it. Well, we don't need to make it really easy to install...it already it. "sudo apt-get install gimp" or go to the software centre, find gimp and click on install. So the question is, what should we replace it with? Gthumb? Xpaint? I'll be honest with you, i've never used them. I don't do photos. If there is no replacement for gimp that is good, then don't get rid of it. But we need a sort of "paint-style" app for ubuntu that will do simple stuff, like cropping, resizing, rotating, simple drawing (squares, circles) and then everyone is happy. Conclusion F-spot is crap. Get rid of it. Now that f-spot is out, get rid of mono. Its a space hogger. Get rid of gimp, and replace it with a "paint-style" app.

I just found this link http://tinyurl.com/lwy2fb – before, I describe things in it, go read it. Go on.

Now, lets see, where shall I start? The title…”Apple Saves Twitter Universe From Twitpocalypse”. Sorry, no, they didn’t. They fixed 1 app. That is all. They didn’t save the “Twitter Universe” at all. Twitter worked perfectly fine, so did twitterfox, and loads of other apps.

Reports warned that Twitter would allegedly stop working once the number of tweets surpassed 2,147,483,647

Not quite…Twitter worked fine. It is some twitter apps that stopped working, because of the number of bits they used to count the tweets.

Apple rose to the occasion in epic fashion to push through approval of the crucial Twitterrific update in record time.

I’m sorry, but it is not record time. If i remember correctly, the flaw was recognised a few weeks ago, and was steadily getting bigger and bigger as it got nearer to the time. There are plenty of twitter apps that pushed updates to fix twitpocalypse BEFORE it happened. Not 17 hours afterwards.

Meanwhile, the rest of the anxious Twitterverse tweeted news of the impending 2.0.2 update submission over and over again ad nauseum, with hundreds of Twits repeating the exact same text launched as the only glimmer of hope during the Twitpocalypse blackout that struck Twitterrific.

O trust me, I know. I was fed up of people posting that stupid tweet. If people cared about the twitterrific update, they would be following twitterrific. I don’t care about twitterrific. ReTweeting was clearly abused in this case, where thousands of people retweeted the same annoying tweet that told tens of thousands of people that don’t care about it.

Basically, this blog post is saying how apple is amazing because they pushed through the twitterrific update through the app store in 17 hours. However, I am saying that the update should have been created at least a week before hand, when we already knew about it (and if they don’t know about it, they clearly don’t listen to their users, because there were loads of people talking about it for WEEKS).

Apple can’t be congratulated for doing what they should have been doing. It shouldn’t take that long to push an update through the app store. This clearly just highlights Apple’s app store ideas.

I am just annoyed that twitterrific and Apple are being congratulated for this, when loads of apps that I use never stopped working. Twitterfox, gwibber, s60twitter. I’m sorry, but when you hear that this is going to happen, you change the 2 lines of code that changes the number of bits in the code. Simple.

I just found this link http://tinyurl.com/lwy2fb - before, I describe things in it, go read it. Go on. Now, lets see, where shall I start? The title..."Apple Saves Twitter Universe From Twitpocalypse". Sorry, no, they didn't. They fixed 1 app. That is all. They didn't save the "Twitter Universe" at all. Twitter worked perfectly fine, so did twitterfox, and loads of other apps. Reports warned that Twitter would allegedly stop working once the number of tweets surpassed 2,147,483,647 Not quite...Twitter worked fine. It is some twitter apps that stopped working, because of the number of bits they used to count the tweets. Apple rose to the occasion in epic fashion to push through approval of the crucial Twitterrific update in record time. I'm sorry, but it is not record time. If i remember correctly, the flaw was recognised a few weeks ago, and was steadily getting bigger and bigger as it got nearer to the time. There are plenty of twitter apps that pushed updates to fix twitpocalypse BEFORE it happened. Not 17 hours afterwards. Meanwhile, the rest of the anxious Twitterverse tweeted news of the impending 2.0.2 update submission over and over again ad nauseum, with hundreds of Twits repeating the exact same text launched as the only glimmer of hope during the Twitpocalypse blackout that struck Twitterrific. O trust me, I know. I was fed up of people posting that stupid tweet. If people cared about the twitterrific update, they would be following twitterrific. I don't care about twitterrific. ReTweeting was clearly abused in this case, where thousands of people retweeted the same annoying tweet that told tens of thousands of people that don't care about it. Basically, this blog post is saying how apple is amazing because they pushed through the twitterrific update through the app store in 17 hours. However, I am saying that the update should have been created at least a week before hand, when we already knew about it (and if they don't know about it, they clearly don't listen to their users, because there were loads of people talking about it for WEEKS). Apple can't be congratulated for doing what they should have been doing. It shouldn't take that long to push an update through the app store. This clearly just highlights Apple's app store ideas. I am just annoyed that twitterrific and Apple are being congratulated for this, when loads of apps that I use never stopped working. Twitterfox, gwibber, s60twitter. I'm sorry, but when you hear that this is going to happen, you change the 2 lines of code that changes the number of bits in the code. Simple.