<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- name="generator" content="blosxom/2.0" -->
<!DOCTYPE rss PUBLIC "-//Netscape Communications//DTD RSS 0.91//EN" "http://my.netscape.com/publish/formats/rss-0.91.dtd">

<rss version="0.91">
  <channel>
    <title>sjh - mountain biking running linux vegan geek spice   </title>
    <link>https://svana.org/sjh/diary</link>
    <description>mtb / vegan / running / linux / canberra / cycling / etc</description>
    <language>en</language>

  <item>
    <title>[comp/ip] More open source required in government</title>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 12:36:00 </pubDate>
    <link>https://svana.org/sjh/diary/2009/05/14#2009-05-14_01</link>
    <description>&lt;!-- 2009-05-14 12:36:59 --&gt;

With the Diebold voting software fiascos in the US and other areas the past
few years there has been a lot of proof that any voting systems on computers
should be open source (even though governments around the world have not yet
cottoned on to this). A few years ago (June 2005) I 
&lt;a href=&quot;https://svana.org/sjh/diary/2005/06/07#2005-06-07_03&quot;&gt;commented on
some&lt;/a&gt; DUI charges being tossed out of a Florida court due to the lack of
open source code available for the breathalysers. I followed on with mention
of problems with speed cameras in Australia playing up also.

&lt;p&gt;

Today Schneier had some 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/05/software_proble.html&quot;&gt;information
on breathalysers&lt;/a&gt; that due to court orders finally had the source made
available for some analysis. This is not the same breath test system as used
in the Florida case from what I can tell at a glance (this was a New Jersey
case), however it definitely opens your eyes once more on how crap closed
source software can be (and yes I admit lots of open source software can also
be crap) and you will have no idea, and no way to fix it. Any software used in
law enforcement in such a way that it could be so incorrect or wrong and yet
still cause someone to lose their licence or gain a criminal record really
should be opened up, at least to the agency/government/force using the
software, if not open to all people.
</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>[comp/ip] Lack of transparency in Government opens up big problems.</title>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2005 18:26:00 </pubDate>
    <link>https://svana.org/sjh/diary/2005/06/07#2005-06-07_03</link>
    <description>&lt;!-- 2005-06-07 18:26:15 --&gt;

There was 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/06/judges_toss_out_duis.html&quot;&gt;mention&lt;/a&gt;
this morning on BoingBoing about judges in Florida tossing out DUI cases when defendants
ask to see the source code of the breathalysers that read the amount of
Alcohol present in their system. I find this fascinating.

&lt;p&gt;

The companies that manufacture the breathalysers do not want to release their
internal implementation details to anyone, and thus because there is
absolutely no proof or independent audit here of how these things really work
the case has to be thrown out of court.

&lt;p&gt;

When I was talking to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.stillhq.com/&quot;&gt;Mikal&lt;/a&gt; about this I
suggested that due to the fact I do not drink often or much I personally would
not be exploiting this specific style of loophole, however I thought it opened
up a whole lot of things to wonder about the legal process, Police
implementation of technology and the transparency of such. Think about speed
cameras and speed radars, I imagine the Police have some testing framework for
Radars and some other devices, but how extensive is it? How much can it be
trusted? Mikal mentioned a case in Victoria where lots of speeding
fines had to be ignored due to a problem with a speed camera.

&lt;p&gt;

Some googling found this 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/12/1068329631374.html&quot;&gt;The
Age&lt;/a&gt; article about this case, they found a number of cameras were faulty
and withheld infringement notices from those cameras for a while. Mikal
mentioned it took an ACA story about some Datsun 180B unable to to get over
80KMh on a race track with a race driver that had been booked by the cameras
at 120KMh to get some sort of response on the issue.

&lt;p&gt;

Now I would suggest against going out and trying to get a speeding ticket from
a speed camera simply to test the &quot;show me the source&quot; argument in court, but
it does make you wonder what processes of government really should be more
open and transparent. I do not hold out much hope in the short term that the
general public will understand the need for this though, the ACT Voting
system, which had been released as a 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://evacs.samba.org/&quot;&gt;completely open system&lt;/a&gt; has since been
placed under a more &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.softimp.com.au/evacs.html&quot;&gt;closed form
of source distribution&lt;/a&gt; with the source code no longer under a fully public
licence and less transparent to the public. Sure the actual release of evacs
used in any given election undergoes a full audit process and that audited
release is frozen for that election, however the whole process is far more
hidden and there was not much public outcry in ACT or Australia about this
change.

&lt;p&gt;

It also makes you wonder, in what ways can you possibly convince the general
public to push for a more open and transparent government, one is to convince
them it would be in their benefit, if under Australian law a DUI or speeding
fine could be avoided without full transparency it may for example push
the process toward that goal along if people exploited that.</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>[comp/ip] Genealogy of ideas</title>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:53:00 </pubDate>
    <link>https://svana.org/sjh/diary/2004/11/16#2004-11-16_01</link>
    <description>&lt;!-- 2004-11-16 10:53:26 --&gt;

Another article by &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gladwell.com/&quot;&gt;Malcolm Gladwell&lt;/a&gt;,
this &lt;a href=&quot;http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?041122fa_fact&quot;&gt;discussing&lt;/a&gt;
the origins of ideas and where to draw the line between simple obvious ideas
anyone could have and ideas that are copyright-able due to complexity or
combination.

&lt;p&gt;

In reality the article is mostly about a case of a playwright using quotes from
an older Gladwell article and not acknowledging the source publicly. However
it does present some interesting viewpoints. Everyone when thinking of new
stuff builds on prior knowledge, this is why we have libraries and why we read
and learn in the first place.

</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>[comp/ip] Software patents, branding and broken revenue models</title>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:12:00 </pubDate>
    <link>https://svana.org/sjh/diary/2004/11/10#2004-11-10_01</link>
    <description>&lt;!-- 2004-11-10 12:12:20 --&gt;

Hugh Macleod of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gapingvoid.com/&quot;&gt;Gapingvoid&lt;/a&gt; wrote
again why 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/001111.html&quot;&gt;Branding
is dead&lt;/a&gt;, a lot of the points he makes tie in to other problems with big
companies in the modern era. How these companies want to hold on to the old
way of doing things and don't seem interested in trying new ways of making
money that would be less offensive to their customers throughout the
world. The problem for these companies is that they lose out in the end trying
to hang on to dying revenue models. One point in particular caught my
attention, &quot;4. &quot;Branding&quot; is backwards looking. It's all about capturing past
associations. It's never about what the business could become, but protecting
what came before.&quot; as this is at the centre of how companies seem to want to
do all their business. Patents (notably 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent&quot;&gt;software patents&lt;/a&gt;)
are another similar backward looking mechanism that is broken in the 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/index.cgi/IP/2004-10-14.html&quot;&gt;current
application&lt;/a&gt; of them. More of the points on branding being dead and are
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.boingboing.net/2004/11/06/brands_arent_worth_a.html&quot;&gt;provided&lt;/a&gt;
by Cory at boingboing, and though I have not read it this wired 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.11/brands.html&quot;&gt;article&lt;/a&gt; on
the subject is recommended.</description>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>