tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-58607256709353632502024-02-08T16:45:19.166+01:00VikenpediaAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-28696354331160583692013-06-09T02:00:00.000+02:002013-07-15T22:12:39.837+02:00Wi-Fi connection File Format<h1>Wi-Fi connection File Format</h1>
<p>
In this article I’ll try to present one new standard ta needs to be created and demonstrate how it can be used by a Wi-Fi Hotspot provider. This is based on Scenario 3 in my article <a href="http://www.vikenpedia.org/2013/05/wireless-guest-networks.html"> Wireless Guest Networks </a>
</p>
<h2>The scenario (summary)</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>Wi-Fi Hotspot provider</li>
<li>Needs rigid solution</li>
<li>Needs to identify every user</li>
<li>Needs billing options</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>The solution</h2>
<p>
This solution is split into two parts, First I’m going to present the WiFi Connection File Format, then I’m going to explain how this fits into the scenario.
</p>
<h3>The File Format</h3>
This is going to be a standardized, clear text file format containing everything you need to connect to a wireless network. My suggested mockup is like this:
</p>
<pre>
SSID v1.0
[basic]
SSID:Hotspot
security:WPA2-Enterprise
EAP:EAP-TLS
[EAP-TLS]
username:exampleuser
password:examplepassword
cert:(some certificate fingerprint)
cert:(another certificate fingerprint)
[Signature]
(Signature for the above document) (optional)
</pre>
<p>
Let’s start from the top. The first line is a declaration of the file format and the version of that file format.
The second line is a section declaration declaring that the following settings are basic settings.
The next few lines consists of key:value pairs separated with a newline.
The next section contains specialized settings for EAP-TLS, this is just an example, but imagine that this is supposed to provide all the information needed to connect to that network, no questions asked.
The signature section is optional, It’s a signature confirming the authenticity of the above document and contains all the information needed to authenticate it. I would personally just use regular X.509 certificates in some way.
</p>
<p>
The reason for standardizing the file format is to have one standard way of providing the credentials; without having to coach the user using a long series of screenshots to do it. You can simply download this file and auto-run it. The Wi-Fi manager will then ask you if you want to apply these settings to that SSID, prompt you for overwriting ask you for approval of signature (if needed) and apply the settings.
</p>
<h3>Solving the problem</h3>
<p>
For this hotspot provider, there is a number of ways this could be applied as a solution.
Common for all solutions is that they use WPA2-Enterprise (RADIUS) as the primary connection and authentication system. The service provider still needs to do a lot of work on the back-end of the system, but they can now trust the client device to remember the credentials and they don’t have to ask the user to authenticate every time. For expired subscriptions you can simply use RADIUS to kick the user off to a walled-garden VLAN with enough access to renew their subscription.
</p>
<h4>Option 1</h4>
<p>
User registration and authentication could simply happen over on a separate SSID in exactly the same way as hotspot solutions do today. The exception is that after completing the signup (or just regular login) the user is sendt a settings file and connects to the secured SSID.
</p>
<h4>Option 2</h4>
<p>
Same as Option 1, but using [WPA-Guest] on the same SSID.
</p>
<h2>Pros</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>Pretty easy to use, and easier than manual setup.</li>
<li>Secure (depending on setup)</li>
<li>Most Hotspot providers need to do most of this work anyway</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>Cons</h2>
<ul>
<li>Harder to set up</li>
</ul>
<h2>Summary</h2>
<p>
That completes the planned part of my series on wireless guest networks. If anyone in a position to do anything about this find this interesting, feel free to contact me, I really want to see this implemented.
</p>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-45072548260176018562013-06-02T02:00:00.000+02:002013-06-02T02:00:02.646+02:00Introducing EAP-Guest<h1>Introducing EAP-Guest</h1>
<p>
In this article I’ll try to present a solution for providing encrypted wifi with authentication free access. This is based on Scenario 2 in my article <a href="http://www.vikenpedia.org/2013/05/wireless-guest-networks.html"> Wireless Guest Networks </a>
</p>
<h2>The scenario (summary)</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>Public access Wi-Fi provider</li>
<li>Many users</li>
<li>Many access points</li>
<li>Large coverage area</li>
<li>No need to identify individual users</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>The solution</h2>
<p>
As I hinted in my last article this article is going to introduce something that is as of yet not developed. As the title hinted to we are going to use WPA(2)-Enterprise and introduce a new EAP type, I’m going to call it EAP-Guest.
</p>
<h3>EAP-Guest, Overview</h3>
<p>
EAP Guest is a new EAP type that can be announced in the beacon (as a vendor specific extension) and can work in parallel with other EAP types on the same SSID. It requires no authentication credentials from the client, but does a couple of authentication exchanges to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks.
</p>
<h3>AEP-Guest, User perspective</h3>
<p>
The beacon includes EAP-Guest, so the padlock icon next to the SSID in the browser is set to something to make it stand out. This could be an open padlock, a padlock and a key or even a padlock with a G on it.<br />
When the User selects the network, the client device initiates a regular WPA-Enterprise authentication session with EAP type EAP-Guest. During that authentication and identification run the service provider signs it’s packets with a X.509 certificate. The certificate is the tricky part, you need a central CA (Certificate Authority) to sign it. Issuing certificates for SSIDs are not an option, that’s way too complicated to enforce. I suggest using regular X.509 certificates for web use and present the domain and organization to the user for approval. When the certificate is approved the client device needs to store it for future use. Since there are large networks with multiple providers (e.g. eduroam) the client must be able to store multiple of these certificates.<br />
Once the authentication process is completed (failure is an option) the client is returned a URL to go to and accepted into the network. The client must direct the user to this URL in a web-browser if the platform supports it.
</p>
<h2>Pros</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>Easy to use</li>
<li>Secure</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>Cons</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>Hard to set up</li>
<li>Requires new technology</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>Summary</h2>
<p>
The EAP-Guest solution is an imagined future solution to this problem and the very reason I wrote this series of articles. If you are a service provider and need user authentication on top of this solution, you only have to add a layer-3 security portal on top of WPA-Guest, this is the main motivation for the URL return at the end of the sequence. In the next article I’ll present a solution that I think is an even better solution for hotspot service providers.
</p>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-47727062263105154552013-05-26T02:00:00.000+02:002013-05-26T02:00:05.676+02:00The simplest wireless guest solution<h1>The simplest wireless guest solution</h1>
<p>
In this article I’ll try to present the simplest and cheapest solution available to any free Wi-Fi provider to offer encryption. This is based on Scenario 1 in my article <a href="http://www.vikenpedia.org/2013/05/wireless-guest-networks.html"> Wireless Guest Networks </a>
</p>
<h2>The scenario (summary)</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>The provider is a coffee shop, let’s call them “Coffee ‘N WiFi”</li>
<li>The provider needs a cheap and simple solution.</li>
<li>Low traffic scenario</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>The solution</h2>
<p>
Encrypt your Wi-Fi with WPA2-PSK and publish the key. All you need to do is to make a plaque saying: “Internet! Network: CoffeNwifi; Password: Cappuccino”
</p>
<h2>Pros</h2>
<p>
<ul>
<li>Easy to set up</li>
<li>No need for expensive equipment</li>
<li>Available today</li>
</ul>
</p>
<h2>Cons</h2>
<ul>
<li>Doesn’t scale very well</li>
<li>Users need to know the password</li>
<li>Still possible to crack if you intercept the handshake</li>
</ul>
<h2>Summary</h2>
<p>
The PSK solution is simple and it does increase security one notch. Unfortunately it does not scale, so next week I’m going to present the second solution. That one is going to invent something new and would require vendor adaptation before it can be used.
</p>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-7147699090997248072013-05-19T02:00:00.000+02:002013-05-19T02:00:02.890+02:00Wireless guest networks<h1>Wireless guest networks</h1>
<p>
Ever since the Google “Wi-Fi Scandal” the “outrage” of certain individuals has struck me. Or more correctly the fact that privacy advocates are screaming bloody murder; while it seems nobody noticed that anyone with half a brain and a laptop could do the exact same thing. As long as you use an unencrypted network, everyone can just sniff out all of your communication right over the air in clear text. If you use unencrypted Wi-Fi at home you are asking to get hacked, plain and simple.
</p>
<p>
Ten I got hit by a bomb of a revelation hit me, guest and public access networks. I’ve thought about the solution for a very long time. This is going to be the first post in a series of articles discussing the various solutions to the problem and their strengths/weaknesses. This first article is going to present a few use cases, the following articles are going to present the solution to each of the scenarios presented.
</p>
<h2>Scenario 1</h2>
<p>
A small coffee shop wants to offer free Wi-Fi to attract customers. They do not have a significant revenue so they can’t afford an expensive solution.
</p>
<h2>Scenario 2</h2>
<p>
A public access network provider. They need to connect users securely, no need for user identification.
</p>
<h2>Scenario 3</h2>
<p>
Wi-Fi hotspot provider. Needs per-user authentication but also authentication-free access for user registration.
</p>
<p>
I’ll do my best to type up these articles before I start posting, and post them about a week apart.
</p>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-45471294734530533502012-05-29T22:51:00.002+02:002012-05-29T22:51:32.310+02:00Creationism againI recently got this comment:<br />
"Evolution is not a fact, it is a delusion brought on by atheists who are desperate to grasp onto any crackpot explanation for how man came to be."<br />
<br />
And the followup:<br />
<br />
"A Christian who believes in macro evolution is as deluded as a satanist who goes to church every Sunday. As a Christian I don't claim to know exactly how old the universe is, but I do know God created man as he is today, not as a microorganism that slowly and randomly 'evolved'. This is the real world bro, not some Pokemon knockoff."<br />
<br />
Let me see: Pokémon created by Satoshi Tajiri for Nintendo in 1996.<br />On the Origin of Species, by Charles Darwin in 1859<div>
There's a 137 year gap there that the commenter can't explain because he/she pulled this comment out of their butts in an attempt to ridicule evolution, but only managed to show the lack of real arguments to present.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As for the use of "randomly 'evolved'" that pretty much tells me this person has no understating of natural selection. Natural selection is not random. Evolution is the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators. Using the word random to describe evolution just exposes your lack of understanding. The process is not random at all, there is randomness involved; just as in nuclear fission, but the process is in no way random. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To enforce my point, I am going to take the example of the card game poker. In poker you get a number of random cards. Depending on what type of game you play you can choose to keep or discard certain cards. We can all agree that there is randomness involved, but for some reason the same professional players still rise to the top over and over again. So we are no left with the big question, if poker is truly a game of chance, why are the same group of people always winning? We are therefore forced to conclude that poker is not a random game even thou there is an element of randomness in it. </div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-75258320735860334212012-05-27T11:40:00.000+02:002012-05-27T11:40:16.216+02:00About evolutionI am going to do another of my short two-paragraph rants, this time about evolution and creationism. I'll start out by saying that evolution is a biological process; anyone who writes an argument that is not about biology, do not understand evolution. Secondly origins of life is abiogenesis, not evolution. Thirdly the second law of thermodynamics say that "[I]n a closed system, you can't finish any real physical process with as much useful energy as you had to start with[.]" and "Entropy in a closed system can never decrease."[1] Creationists love to quote this on, but they fail to notice that the earth is not a closed system. Look out of your window, do you see that big ball of Hydrogen and Helium plasma? That is an outside energy source. The second law of thermodynamics does allow for local decreases of entropy within a system; an AC unit is a perfect example. Every solar storm that doesn't hit any thing will increase the entropy of the the universe as a whole. However any energy or radiation that hits earth will add energy to the localized system called earth effectively destroying that argument.<br />
To sum up, if I in any argument tell you that "that has nothing to do with evolution" I really mean it, and I am not going to debate you on that subject unless you add the proper label to it. And the "biology is a subset of chemistry which in turn is a subset of physics" argument is stupid too. Just look at this: <br />
<br />
<div>
A = {1,2,3} B = {5,6,7} C = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}<br />
<div>
It is true that both A and B are both subsets of C, but there is no intersection between A and B so you can't use B to make a proof on A and any thing that applies to B may not necessarily apply to the entirety of C. QED.
<br />
[1] <a href="http://www.panspermia.org/seconlaw.htm" target="_blank">http://www.panspermia.org/seconlaw.htm</a></div>
</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-47770059541651270262012-05-18T22:45:00.000+02:002012-05-18T22:45:06.953+02:00Religious neutrality<p>I've had a discussion lately on separation of church and state. And for some reason, theists (mostly Christians) seems to be having problems seeing the difference between an atheistic state religion and "no state religion" also known as "neutral state religion". Because they see atheism as a religion; atheism is not a religion, just as "not smoking" is a habit, and not collecting stamps is not a hobby. Atheism literally translates to "no god". This includes agnostics by the way, because they have no God. Now, remember I am talking about religious neutrality here, a religiously neutral state has to be agnostic by definition, because acknowledging a God, any god, is taking sides, and breaching neutrality.</p>
<p> Just a little note at the end. In a neutral state, the state do not care if "God hates fags", if someone want to smoke those horrible things and poison themselves, they should be free to do so. Allowing cigarettes is not going to infringe on your rights not to smoke them, so why are you complaining anyway? And by the way, pun intended, and it applies to both interpretations.</p>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-60525886676148031752012-05-18T19:18:00.001+02:002013-05-24T23:53:03.423+02:00Richard FeynmanI'm making a habit out of posting youtube videos, but I really don't care. Here are some videos of Richard Feynman on science.
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="566" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/o1dgrvlWML4" width="755"></iframe>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="566" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EYPapE-3FRw" width="755"></iframe>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="566" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M5fc4oV2F3o" width="755"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-77135852174453710152012-05-18T15:40:00.000+02:002012-05-18T15:40:15.280+02:00Stupid arguments #1The other day I got the following argument thrown at me from a creationist: "Newton didn't believe in evolution"<br />
Why is this wrong on so manny levels, and why is this argument stupid? Lets's start off:<br />
Sir Isaac Newton, 4 January 1643 – 31 March 1727 (Gregorian calendar)<br />
Charles Robert Darwin, 12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882<br />
Darwin's Book: "On the Origin of Species" where evolution were introduced. - 1959<br />
Isaac Newton died 132 years before the theory of evolution were even coined, did you really think nobody would realize that? Or is it a habit of young earth creationists to ignore documented death dates in favor of imaginary ideas.<br />
One phrase comes to mind: "<b>Shame on you"</b>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-78465780048427240692012-05-07T21:57:00.000+02:002012-05-07T21:57:02.659+02:00Godwin's lawI see a lot of "pulling Godwin's law" in my future, so I'm going to do some clarification on exactly what that means.<br />
When I pull Godwin's law that means that somebody used the argument "The Nazis (...) so therefore (...)" Same goes for Hitler, Al Qaeda, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao etc. I'll even extend it to "Jesus". And the argument I make is this: Just because someone liked or disliked something does not mean that thing is automatically good or bad; and if you make such an absurd claim you automatically lost your credibility in the conversation.<br />
When I pull a Reverse Godwins law, that means I'm using a Godwin's Law analogy to show that your argument is absurd; usually by injecting the Nazi's or Hitler into your argument. For instance: Hitler probably won a lot of debates; killing jews is still bad and winning a debate is not evidence of truth.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-70123588706081157342012-05-04T11:14:00.001+02:002012-05-04T11:14:10.424+02:00If you want to prove creation by God, explain this.This goes for Intelligent design, and creationist.<br />
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9136200/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/chimp-genetic-code-opens-human-frontiers/<br />
The only catch is: You need to do it without using the argument "Well, that's how God crated it", that argument is not scientific, I'll leave the explanation of why to Richard Feynman.<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EYPapE-3FRw" width="420"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Look at the part when he says: so vague it can predict anything.<br />
<br />
If you are of the people who believe God designed the laws of nature and set off the big bang, you probably do believe in evolution, and therefore this challenge do not apply to you.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-34269522946233435042012-04-24T23:27:00.002+02:002012-04-24T23:30:45.041+02:00Presenting: Vikens law of legal exploitationsI am not a politician, and I do not study law, but still I am going to present you with a law or observation.<br />
This is not a law in a legal system, nor a scientific law, this is a observational pattern; I'll go as far as to call it a theorem. However what it does describe is a pattern in a legal system, and it goes like this:<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">If a law can be demonstrated to be exploitable for malicious intent; that exploit will, at some point, almost certainly be used for malicious intents.</span><br />
Now let me explain this.<br />
<br />
Here's the logic, and if anyone could help me formulate this as formal logic i would be very thankful.<br />
<br />
a.1: Most publicly traded corporations have an obligation to their shareholders to make as much a profit as they possibly can.<br />
a.2: A subset of all corporations will use any non-illegal means available to them to maximize their profits.<br />
b.1: Equal competition makes for lower prices and lower profits and visa versa.<br />
b.2: Fewer competitors means less equal competition.<br />
b.3: Decreased equality in competition means higher prices and therefore profits.<br />
c: Taking a share of a competitors profit margin is a practically free profit increase, and increases competition inequality.<br />
d: A Judicial process is in itself a burden and may kill a weaker party before its completion.<br />
e: Use of an unintended consequence of a law is not illegal.<br />
<br />
'a' means that corporations are generally, but not always inherently greedy and a subset may use any non-illegal means to maximize it.<br />
'b' Implies that lower competitive equality is beneficial with regards to 'a'<br />
'c' Implies that a scenario beneficiary towards 'b.2', 'b.3' and 'a' can be achieved my using means commonly associated with intellectual property.<br />
'd' States that if a strong party sue a small party, no matter what the ultimate legal outcome might be, the small party may go bankrupt before the process has been completed and may be beneficiary towards 'b.2'.<br />
'e' States that a member of the subset described in 'a.2' may use a unintended consequence or ambiguity to maximize their profits in ways including but not limited to 'c' and 'd'<br />
<br />
The reason I wrote this law down is to formalize why a lawmaker confronted with a scenario; in which a proposed law is exploited, with malicious intent beyond the scope of the original intent of the law; should not be able to get away with the answer "That's not the intention of the law, that is never going to happen". <b>It is very likely to happen.</b> So don't let anyone get away with it; if they actively avoid addressing the problem, it is a possibility that the law was written with this intent in mind, in order to exploit that exact ambiguity and/or loophole.<br />
<br />
This is a work in progress so any comments are welcome.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-25229492890718361502012-03-15T19:44:00.001+01:002012-03-15T19:44:18.143+01:00Copyright and damages<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GZadCj8O1-0" width="560"></iframe><br />I rest my case from earlier. The numbers are way screwed up.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-41191894425899637692012-02-26T14:21:00.002+01:002012-02-26T14:21:33.490+01:00The misconceptions of piracy and damagePriacy is a huge subjects nowadays. But everyone advocating "strike down on piracy" always overestimates the damages. There is a political motivation behind it is clear, it is a rhetorical means to make the "economical impact" seem bigger; or it might just be that they still haven't realized that the rules and limitations of physical goods do not apply to the digital world. I am not advocating piracy, but come on let us keep it real. I have seen two lesser book authors complaining about "I don't want people to steal my stuff" and implied "there should be zero tolerance on piracy", I might add that one was all for SOPA and the other was like "I'm not for SOPA but I think the 'piracy problem' should be solved" or in other words, "SOPA in unpopular, so I oppose that; rename it to CtIA and I'll be all for it".<br /><br />Here's the real facts:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Some people (in a lot of cases it is most of them) who download from the internet would never have bought your product anyway.</li>
<li>Some people buy your product because they downloaded it, and liked it enough to buy it.</li>
<li>Some people download an album, like the music and attend a concert.</li>
<li>Some people bought your product and lost or damaged their copy, you only allow digital media to be downloaded once, and make it impossible to make a legitimate copy; that is your fault, you and your closed minded policies.</li>
</ul>
Another thing you need to understand: If somebody steals a DVD, a book or a video game; something physical has disappeared from a shelf, that cost money and raw materials to make; somebody is going to have to pay for that. That is in addition to the upfront production costs but if your movie sucked and nobody bought it, you would still have to pay for that.<br /><br /><br />
The real problem with the industry is that they are competing with anyone now; in music, if you are a competent artist you do not need the labels anymore. The big record companies are no longer able to bend the market to their will. And they don't realize that good artists who make good music can sell music too, you don't have to play on sex to sell music anymore; and most importantly, you don't have to be backed by a label to sell your music with sex.<br />
<br />
Journalism is another issue, but they understand the competition they are under (all except Rupert Murdoch, but that is a different matter) and I'll just point out <a href="http://buzzmachine.com/">Jeff Jarvis</a>, and his book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0061709697/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=2m-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0061709697">What Would Google Do?</a>; "It's not the 1950's anymore, get over it; today you have to engage with your audiences."<br /><br />
Lastly, TV and radio; You really don't need anything more than <a href="http://www.twit.tv/">Leo Laporte's TWiT network</a> to really understand it. He created a media empire from scratch and he gives away his content for *free*. Don't tell me it is impossible to make money by giving away your content; you can.<br />
<br />
Additional reading:<br />
<a href="http://c4vi.me/zVoJ9g">Jonathan Coulton and pircay</a>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-79964522621640761422012-02-06T20:23:00.001+01:002012-02-06T20:25:55.126+01:00NewMedia vs Old MediaI'm going to do a very quick post on one brilliant example of how the old media companies.<br /><br />The video "This is Aperture" - A portal style remake of the song "This is Halloween" form "The Nightmare Before Christmas" (Touchstone/Disney) has gone somewhat viral on YouTube, and it is made by a complete outsider... this is a Genuine fan-work. An old Media company would go "Charge! bring out the DMCA and sue him to hell and back."; now can you guess what Valve did?<br />http://www.valvenews.net/2012/this-is-aperture/<br />They embraced it as exactly what it is: Fan made free advertising.<br />Go VALVE!<br />If everyone did this instead of trying to fix a flawed system by regulations like SOPA<br /> <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/JZIVmKOdrBk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-32312962915536747932011-12-14T21:01:00.001+01:002011-12-15T16:02:32.572+01:00Review of Locked On by Tom Clancy, and Mark GreaneyThis is a review of the book "Locked On" by Tom Clancy, and Mark Greaney; released Dec.13. 2011.<br />
<br />
Locked On was somewhat of a letdown; first of all it was way too short, the buildup was too fast and you struggle to keep up with the story. Secondly, there is too few unnamed characters, a classic Tom Clancy take is to include characters that are only known by their job titles and only appear in that chapter to<br />
follow the progress of one item whose relevance to the story arc is only revealed later.<br />
<br />
However the story in itself is amazing; it has plenty of action and it still has me yelling at my MP3-player. (I love audible) I'm not going to give away too much story, but the book ends very suddenly, when there was 15 minutes left I was scrambling through my audible library to find the last part, it's not there, the story wraps up to fast and too abruptly, it feels like there's missing a chapter in there somewhere. Then it stops on a open ending just right out of the blue; even Debt of Honor had a buildup throughout the book, and through Executive Orders and up to The bear and the dragon, the reader saw it coming.<br />
<br />
As for Lou Diamond Phillips, he is an amazing reader and I really wish somebody could have him retroactively narrate the rest of the Jack Ryan series. (I'd pay to receive new versions)<br />
<br />
Quick summary:<br />
The book has an amazing story, but it is told too quickly and too chaotically, I'll write a post at a later time that outlines what I miss from the classic Clancy writing style and what, that one will have a MAJOR spoiler alert on it (regarding the entire series)<br />
<br />
5/6 for the book<br />
6/6 for the story<br />
4/6 for the presentation<br />
6/6 for the narration<br /><br />Purchase options:<br />
<iframe frameborder="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" src="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?lt1=_blank&bc1=000000&IS2=1&bg1=FFFFFF&fc1=000000&lc1=0000FF&t=2m-20&o=1&p=8&l=as4&m=amazon&f=ifr&ref=ss_til&asins=039915731X" style="height: 240px; width: 120px;"></iframe>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-5560678964860647222011-12-12T21:12:00.000+01:002011-12-12T21:12:58.987+01:00War between religions... Really?Religions; that is the most outrageous joke ever. Listen why is it that everybody (in countries with a christian majority) seems to fear muslims. I'm just asking because this really sounds f***ed up.<br />
Can't we just start calling, the christians, jews and muslims (alphabetically) for Abrahamic religions?<br />
Trust me, there is less difference between jews and muslims than there is between the two most different christian branches? The diference would be in taxonomy only, but by forcing everyone to address them as branches of the abrahamic religion someone might realize that they are in fact worshiping the same god; just in different ways; not that that has stopped branches of the same religion from hating each others guts as it is.<br />
I'll just end this rant by saying that I am an atheist and I RESPECT just about every religion. And I am all for the choice of your own religion.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-35781525935142287052011-11-16T14:25:00.001+01:002011-11-16T14:26:04.151+01:00Plus One<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is probably way to
late to comment on this but I’ll do it anyway. I love the concept of the +1
button, and the brand. An unfortunate problem with Facebook’s “like” branding
is in stories as this one <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57319440/thailand-flood-death-toll-passes-500/">Thailand
flood death toll passes 500</a> (CBS News) followed by “x people ‘like’ this”.
The intention is and has always been “this is worth reading”, but the double
entendre is that it feels too much like “this is good news”. This has lead to
the requests for the “dislike” button. But at the same time, this would be a
button used for signaling “this article is a piece of crap” not what most
requesters from my point of view seem to actually want “This is terrible news,
read it”.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The +1 button on the
other hand is brilliant in that respect. There is no emotions associated with
+1, it says exactly what it should say: “I found this worthwhile reading”. Good
job google!<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Digg: You are doomed!</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-83116501622047625142011-10-18T22:10:00.000+02:002011-10-18T22:10:37.433+02:00Freedom to the Internet<p>The Internet is the new frontier, it develops faster than any anion or state is able to keep up with. Inspired by Jeff Jarvis’ book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1451636008/ref=as_li_ss_til?tag=2m-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1451636008&adid=0MS5S1C9ZBE7GANV55XB&">“Public Parts”</a> I hereby want to lie out a basis for the independence of the Internet, for real this time.
</p>
<p>
Introducing the “nation of the Internet, an independent and sovereign state, corporations can register and incorporate in this nation-state to receive it’s legal protection. This means that any state that acknowledges the Nation of the Internet in essence has agreed to contract that protects the corporations from any legal proceedings in that country. Just to clarify here, the corporation as a whole, not the individuals that work there. On the other hand they need to be protected too, if you can’t sue the company you could just sue the CEO; to fix this loophole the employees, and former employees are protected against any Common or Civil lawsuit regarding any actions under name of this corporation, these lawsuits have to be directed towards the corporation, not the individuals. The Nation of the Internet would in itself have a legal system that I will discuss later on.
</p>
<p>
To give nations an incentive to acknowledge the independence of the Internet would have a tax code that is simple and impossible to game; and by constitution tax cuts are banned. Any transaction are geographically bound (billing address) and uniformly taxed, I’ll give details on how later. These taxes are then forwarded to the state that originated the transaction, as long as that state acknowledges the Nation of the Internet. Tax rates would be low for high-taxed countries, but high for low taxed countries, but tax-avoidance in this state would be literally impossible.
</p>
<p>
Why would a corporation choose to incorporate in the Nation of the Internet? The answer is obvious: Legal protection; any corporation incorporated in the Nation of the Internet only needs to comply with the laws of the Internet, not every single law in every country in the world. The corporations are protected from cases like the YouTube Italy case where three Google executives where sentenced to <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/serious-threat-to-web-in-italy.html ">six months in jail</a> because of privacy violations. The law in the Nation of the Internet would be simple, and include a constitutional ban on special interests.
</p>
<p>
Copyright is the greatest dispute on the Internet. How is this solved? First of all: Disney, you are going down. Copyright would remain for 20 years for creative works (movies, photos, recordings etc.) 50 years for one copy original creative works (i.e. Paintings, songs (not the recordings)) No software patents are granted, there is no need for hardware patents, more on why in “limitations of legal protection”, styles and feels can be protected if the intentions of the second party is to trick the user into believing it is using the first party’s service, but a strong application of “similar services may employ similar interfaces” must be done in process of deciding weather it is infringement or not. One last concern I would like to voice on copyright is the right to parody and to link: granted! Fair use should be legislation.
</p>
<p>
No law can be written to apply to one technology; we don’t want to get stuck in a legacy system. Laws should be guidelines, and its application to the specific technologies should be decided in case law, not in legislation. We cannot predict the future; therefore you don’t want law to be locked-in to a legacy system.
</p>
<p>
Who would be eligible for a membership in the Nation of the Internet? Internet business, that means that at least 60% of their revenue comes from Internet sources. And they need enough size to have their own datacenters. This includes ISPs, cell phone operators (smartphones and data plans), and hosting providers. Datacenter providers would provide a blanket protection to all of their customers, but the customers would pay taxes as a local corporation.
</p>
<p>
What would receive legal protection? The companies servers, and internet service; anything said or done by any employee of the company, for the company, the company are eligible for, but only by Nation of the Internet law. A police raid (or any raid by a governmental agency) of a Nation of the Internet datacenter would be considered an act of war; the exception may be environmental issues. (I.e. FCC and RF noise)
</p>
<p>
I’ll finish off with the things I see as a minimum requirement to include in the constitution.
</p>
<ul>
<li>Freedom of speech</li>
<li>The user controls their information (subpoenas may override) this includes everything! The company has access to everything by default; outsiders need to be opted in.</li>
<li>An IP address is not a person! If anyone presents IP addresses as “firm evidence” in a court of any kind that corporation of nation/state would be denied inquiries for such information in a limited future.</li>
<li>A service is not responsible for it’s users actions, but ay be expected to make an attempt to control them.</li>
<li>If you lie about your age, and the age given seems reasonable you are treated that age until a reasonable doubt of your real age has been raised. If doubts about your age are raised you bay be queried for proof; upon receiving the proof the service in question must remember that it has ben provided.</li>
<li>If any users real name are questioned (I.E. persons with similar names to celebrities) the user must be given a chance to prove their real name, and the service in question must remember that proof has ben provided.</li>
</ul>
<p>I seriously doubt this is going to be my last post on this subject.</p>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-68025806343770590042011-10-13T00:49:00.000+02:002011-10-13T00:49:45.405+02:00First look at Apache CassandraI just did the 10000m review of Cassandra, and it is impressive.<br />
The fact that it scales natively is great.<br />
What I don't understand is why they say it is so different from table-based databases.<br />
Sure, it is non-relational, but so what, you can get used to that.<br />
<br />
OK, I am actually used to the AppEngine Datastore, that helps a lot; but still, for being so "non table" it is very table like.<br />
<br />
I'm going to give you the quick overview of how i visualize the cassandra structure.<br />
<br />
- Keyspace<br />
Think of them as "databases" in MySQL<br />
- Column Family<br />
Works almost like a table in MySQL<br />
- Super Column<br />
Works almost like a row in MySQL<br />
- Column<br />
Like a field in MySQL<br />
<br />
Now the cool stuff starts arriving.<br />
- Super Column Family<br />
This is like a table, but every field is a new table. You can add a super column family in Cassandra instead of a column family, then have it contain a number of column families.<br />
- Keys<br />
In cassandra everything is about keys. you can not retrieve anything without a key. Every (super) column family has a name, and every entry has an index (that is a name too); in essence the columns has a key too (names).<br />
So if I had a user named CVi (Me) stored in the database as a user it would be located in the Column Family "users", under the key "CVi". And it would have a number of Columns like email, phone number, real name, etc.<br />
<pre class:"brush:py"="">{
"users":{
"CVi":{
"name":"Christoffer Viken",
"email":"..."
"Phone number":"..."
}
}
}
</pre>
In MySQL terms, think of a table, with one entry, Primary key on that entry is "CVi"; now remember that the only way to access that row is by using the primary key.<br />
Now to really mess things up, let us introduce the Super Column Family. now the data looks something like this:
<br />
<pre class:"brush:py"="">{
"users":{
"CVi":{
"Profile":{
"name":"Christoffer Viken",
"email":"..."
},
"Contact":{
"email":"Contact Email"
},
"logon":{
"password":"jdKTyNXN9ah$nyqpWaTvMWnTeS2z5ThYxqQAyuZ$W29HhnDdBtw7HPvHSA6aCMvR",
"twitter":"90989364"
}
}
}
}
</pre>
Super Column Family: users<br />
Column Family: CVi<br />
Super Columns: profile, contact, logon<br />
Columns(profile): Name, email<br />
<br />
Now remember this is schemaless. There is no structure what so ever. You need to enforce that yourself. That is what is the hardest thing to wrap your head around.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I'm having fun playing and I'm looking forward to to playing some more, i'll check back to you later.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5860725670935363250.post-68817305913831773412011-08-22T15:27:00.000+02:002011-08-22T15:30:33.763+02:00Vikenpedia at bloggerAs a college student I need to prioritize my cash and time, so vikenpedia has been moved to blogger. <div>Vikenpedia is going to end up as a photoblog-ish blog, and is where I'll send everyone.</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18131378884961231340noreply@blogger.com0