Josh's Blog - Comments

Maury Markowitz: Old computer movies

nospam@example.com (Maury Markowitz) — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 14:50:30 -0500

Uggg. This is a terrible "review". The movie stank on every level, from the horrible "special" effects to the utterly moronic plot, to the terrible acting. Nothing about this movie is good. Nothing.

But that's not the problem. Anyone can make a bad movie, after all. What's really the problem here is that it so utterly misses the point, entirely, of the original story. As is the case for all to many people, the writers got all excited about the "cyber" and utterly missed the "punk".

Punk music, in its most classic UK form, wraps up three important aspects. First is the reduction of the music itself to a bare minimum - just grind out the licks, three chords at most, and get it over with as quickly as possible. After all, point number two is the about the utter failure of modern society, so why write long songs about it? Number three is the utter disregard for everyone, mostly "the establishment" at a high level, but also the listener, and especially the artist themselves. It's not just the society failed, it's that I want it to fail, because I hate it.

The canonical example of punk in its pure form is "Anarchy in the UK" by the Sex Pistols. Johnny's sneering delivery barely drowns out the terrible mixing and sound quality as he stares through the audience and hollers about how everyone and everything is pointless - the UDA is nothing more than a housing board.

Soooo… Johnny Mnemonic. You see, the original story is punk in every essence. Johnny lives on the fringes of society, a high tech thief, sort of, with low-class customers. The story only exists because one of his customers screws up. So Johnny goes on the lam with a thrill-kill bodyguard and gets help from a bunch of techno-rejects living on sweating plywood held together with poorly mixed epoxy. They win, the end.

That's punk. In every way. From it's minimalist writing to its short timeline to its rejection of all of civilized society.

And then there's the movie. Forget everything these that sucked about it, and focus only on whether or not this movie was punk. Was it short? Simple? Did it exist on the fringe? No, no and no! Oh, there was cyber all right, but zero punk whatsoever.

Before Gibson sci-fi looked like westerns or perfect utopia worlds like in 2001. Then along came Star Wars in 1977 and suddenly sci-fi was gritty and real. And then in 1981 Omni publishes Johnny Mnemonic and any final connection with the past breaks apart.

I remember reading Johnny Mnemonic for the first time as a kid in high school. It, quite literally, made my brain start working in a different way.

So that's why this movie deserves to be spit on, not because it royally stank to heaven, but because it ruined everything without ruining everything.

B: Firefox in a sandbox with Fedora

nospam@example.com (B) — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 02:48:36 -0400

Thanks for the great post, as a fellow paranoid nut I'm happy to browse in sandbox. But I having a problem with xsel, it keep saying

xsel: Can't open display: 1
: Success

Steve: How Long Does a Flash Drive Last?

nospam@example.com (Steve) — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:53:54 -0400

It would be nice to see same test for USB 3.0 devices. There are too many on a market and the quality is a main concern.

baidu: If a phone tracks you in the forest, does it makes a noise?

nospam@example.com (baidu) — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 04:48:21 -0400

baidu: Encrypting phone calls

nospam@example.com (baidu) — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 04:38:15 -0400

thanks for your post !! it help me very much

Hannah: Firefox in a sandbox with Fedora

nospam@example.com (Hannah) — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 17:00:15 -0400

Big help, big help. And sueplartvie news of course.

Tambrey: If a phone tracks you in the forest, does it makes a noise?

nospam@example.com (Tambrey) — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 16:44:26 -0400

Articles like this really grease the sahtfs of knowledge.

Olivia: Firefox in a sandbox with Fedora

nospam@example.com (Olivia) — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 16:41:00 -0400

Knowledge wants to be free, just like these artielcs!

dv: How Long Does a Flash Drive Last?

nospam@example.com (dv) — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 07:15:58 -0400

I tried that on my USB-stick which I can't write to anymore after just one write. Doesn't work. But it still can read. Pretty awkward, since there are still embarassing photos on it. Don't know how to make it un-readable even by forensics. I'm a bit paranoid and afraid of killing it with fire.

Rick: How Long Does a Flash Drive Last?

nospam@example.com (Rick) — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:40:46 -0400

Thanks for doing this. Most tests I've seen deal with read/write to the raw device. This is the first one I've seen that takes the overhead of a real filesystem into account.

These results are very interesting, but they should be understood in their context.

If the stick is inserted and pulled out frequently, the contacts will probably fail mechanically before the SSD fails electronically.

If the stick is left in place and small files are read/written to it randomly over time (e.g. used as a root/usr/home/... filesystem for a dedicated computer) the failure modes will be similar to those described here, but the random nature and small size of the writes may change things -- this test seems to involve repeated large writes.

It would be interesting to try it with a script that works the filesystem code more intensively.

Brad: How Long Does a Flash Drive Last?

nospam@example.com (Brad) — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:16:55 -0400

Dang...now, if you could just come up with a way to help us remember where we lost than dang flash drive at....I think there are 92 million places.....

Raynes: Firefox in a sandbox with Fedora

nospam@example.com (Raynes) — Tue, 24 May 2011 22:57:23 -0400

And I thought I was the senbisle one. Thanks for setting me straight.

Eagle: Firefox in a sandbox with Fedora

nospam@example.com (Eagle) — Tue, 24 May 2011 22:42:58 -0400

I feel so much happier now I udrnesatnd all this. Thanks!

Josh Bressers: If a phone tracks you in the forest, does it makes a noise?

nospam@example.com (Josh Bressers) — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 07:11:33 -0400

You've clearly missed most of my points, I'm sorry for that.

I'm not saying any of this stuff is right, I wish it wasn't, but at the same time, it's the reality of what we have to live with.

My browser tracks websites visits with my knowledge and express permission. And if I tell it to forget where I've been (or not remember in the first place), it does. This tracking also helps me while it's enabled -- that's the whole point. It's not something the vendor does behind my back for their own benefit and nobody else's.

I'm not talking about your browser, I'm talking about the Internet as a whole. It doesn't matter what you do on the client side, you're being tracked on the server side. They know who you are, you're fooling yourself if you think they don't.

My telco tracks my every movement, yes -- and that just caused a huge privacy scandal in Germany, at the very top. I guess that German MP should learn not to worry instead? But at least that information is well-protected on their servers, where only a court order can get at it, as opposed to J. Random Guy who stumbles upon my lost cellphone, as it's possible when the device itself tracks me.

Such information shouldn't be on your phone, I agree completely. At the same time though, if you lose your phone, you should have taken proper steps to ensure nobody can use it. A good lock screen password and remote wipe are quite necessary.

Look, any living being is in almost-constant danger since the moment it's born. The world is not a safe, stable place and never has been. But the answer is not to stop worrying. If it was, humans would still live in caves. Instead, we did something about it.

I don't say to not worry, I say to not worry too much. You can worry ourself to death. Sometimes we have to accept reality instead of trying to fool ourselves. The current reality is that we're watched nearly 24/7. It's a sad reality, but that's the way it is. We're not in 1984, this is Brave New World.

Felix Pleșoianu: If a phone tracks you in the forest, does it makes a noise?

nospam@example.com (Felix Pleșoianu) — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 00:43:15 -0400

Uh... a "if you're a law-abiding citizen, you have nothing to hide" speech? Seriously? Would you like a camera in your bedroom, and your bathroom too, while we're at it? And what if you're doing illegal things involving... I don't know... planning to overthrow a dictatorship in your country? Surely if it's illegal it must be also wrong!

But this argument has been done to death before. Let's see about your comparisons.

My browser tracks websites visits with my knowledge and express permission. And if I tell it to forget where I've been (or not remember in the first place), it does. This tracking also helps me while it's enabled -- that's the whole point. It's not something the vendor does behind my back for their own benefit and nobody else's.

E-book readers -- good point, and one more reason not to use one.

My telco tracks my every movement, yes -- and that just caused a huge privacy scandal in Germany, at the very top. I guess that German MP should learn not to worry instead? But at least that information is well-protected on their servers, where only a court order can get at it, as opposed to J. Random Guy who stumbles upon my lost cellphone, as it's possible when the device itself tracks me.

Look, any living being is in almost-constant danger since the moment it's born. The world is not a safe, stable place and never has been. But the answer is not to stop worrying. If it was, humans would still live in caves. Instead, we did something about it.

Time to do something about the current problems, too. And the first step for solving them is to make a big fuss and get everyone involved. The alternative is to sleep-walk into Orwell's 1984, and that would be really, really hard to get out of.