Category Archives: Science and Society

Posts on all things scientific; biology, evolution, all the way to computer science (when it’s not about programming or applications), and also some pieces on politics and society in general.

Computers, Science and Society

Time to put the IT-business out of its misery?

I just came across this article about the Apple-Samsung battle:

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/10/apple-samsung-presentation-licensing/

I’ve decided software patents pisses me off… and if they are allowed to be honoured 100% as patent laws intends it… we could just put the IT-business out of its misery and go back to pen and paper (unless there’s a “writing” patent out there somewhere?) … or perhaps we should “call software patents as we see them” and put them out of their misery…?

This is what different (clueless and unfit?) patent clerks have decided to approve:

  • US 5566337 – owned by Apple, A.K.A. the Observerpattern. Kiss SWT, Swing and almost all other GUI frameworks goodbye – they use observation to handle events such as clicking a button.
    • “In a computer including an operating system, an event producer for generating an event and detecting that an event has occurred in the computer and an event consumer which need to be informed when events occur in the computer”
  • US 5969705 – also Apple – details how an operating system can be “multitasking”… filed 1997 and accepted 1999… I knew Windows 95 wasn’t multitasking, but HEY… there are other OS:es out there… like Linux… that was multitasking LONG before 1999…
    • “Method and apparatus for a first process operative in a computer system controlling a user interface on a computer system display under control of a second process operative in the computer system. An event handler is installed for the second process, the event handler servicing events generated for controlling the user interface display under control of the second process. The first process may then perform a first set of functions in the computer system. The first process generates events for controlling the user interface display, the events related to the functions performed by the first process. The event handler receives the events generated by the first process and updates the user interface on the computer system display according to the events generated by the first process and received by the event handler.”
    • Or I guess we could always handle multitasking by having one process doing all of  the above and then having another process jerking off while that happens… reminds me about the “Multi Agent Programming” course on UNI when we had to implement a Multi agent system for playing chess…
  • Or how about US 5911067 – “Application Switching”
    • “A method and apparatus for transferring control between application programs. A messaging means is provided which allows a first application program to indicate to the messaging means that a second application program should assume control. The messaging means receives the message and performs an orderly shutdown of the first application program and messages the second application program that it should commence operation. Upon valid and proper operation of the second application program, the first application program is caused to be suspended, and the second application program is invoked.”
    • An alternative would be to have one application that can run several “programs” like different Wordfiles… or wait… wouldn’t that be just like an operating system starting an…. Application… oh well.. who needs applications… and anyway… who needs to switch between them? Let’s play “Windows” again… it’s an application… right?

I’m certain many people that doesn’t know so much about computers or programming (like the patent (cl/j)erks who approved these patents) will find the whole discussion abstract and boring. Who cares about some bizarre event-something, or some applications-something… and besides, they were smart and they worked hard for their patents… you’re just being a jealous douche bag for not allowing them their well earned cash in…

In an attempt to strike home the preposterous nature of these patents, here are some examples of patents that will never be accepted, because they are as obviously not fit for patenting to the “common man” as most IT-patents are to IT professionals:

  • Waste product gathering and disposal mechanism:
    • A method for gathering waste products in home or industrial environments, and a process for disposing of them. Following these steps: 1) take a plastic bag, place it in a holder such as a waste bin, or just let it lay on the floor, or some other surface where the bag is readily accessible. 2) whenever there’s “waste” (different forms of materials in need of disposal such as wrappers, paper napkins, fruit peals, etc) put it in the bag. 3) once the bag is full (or in the case of perishable waste, at a set time interval such as “several times a week”) tie the open end of the bag and throw it out…. (“Trashcan” patent for detailing the “throwing out” pending…)
  • Garment renewal process:
    • A method for renewing used garments such as socks and shirts. Follow these steps. 1) Wear garments. 2) Throw garments in laundry basket. 3) when you run out of clean clothes, apply water and detergent + mechanical “swashing around” – rinse and dry… 4) voila – clothes are as good as new…

Now why can’t I have those patents, and why do I not deserve them?

Because they are obvious methods for solving trivial problems. Unfortunately for the IT-business the patents awarded for the same obvious methods for the same trivial problems are not obvious to the people awarding the patents. It seems comparing the IT business with the construction business won’t really be worth anything unless you have “digging patents” to be harassed by when you try to build a house…

Ah well… I want to write a bestseller anyway… perhaps I should do a “Grisham” and write about a patent breaking IT company that feeds their employees to the sharks in order to prevent exposing their evil deeds?

Computers, Science and Society

Random thought: Extreme situations

One of the more deadly things you can do is to act normally in an extreme situation.

This goes for extreme weather situations, being taken hostage, living on a planet that may be dying, etc.  etc.  Basically I believe panic will make you react in a predefined way, while keeping your cool will make you react according to the situation.  A few times panic might save you (running from a violent person instead of trying to talk sense to them) while in most cases not panicing will probably get the best result.

Interesting thought: aren’t we presented with “extreme” situations now and then, and once we’ve managed through them, they’re not extreme anymore.  Take for instance, first day at school, first love, first day as a parent, first day of retirement, or being a victim of a crime, being in a car accident, or other accident, being falsely accused, getting fired and being unemployed, etc. etc, there are a buss load of extreme situations out there.

So, the thing is to keep from getting pissed at  your boss for firing you, and trying to get a good letter of recommendation out of it (after all, who say’s you’re getting kicked cause your boss dislikes you?)  Or to stop being a kid yourself once your little ones are on their way, or to get out of that car wreck, and try to get everyone else in it along, before something worse than a roll and a spin happens.

So, it’s all about controlling panic then… or?  Hmmm…

Computers, Humor, Science and Society

Humans

Humans are  in fact not that different to other species. We make a little bit more complex sounds and our territorial behavior is a bit more involved, but to say we’re the crown of creation is rather self involved. The most that can be said about mankind’s standing in the family of species is that we’re the black sheep, or the obnoxious kid sibling everybody has to put up with, or mom and pop will give them a hairy eyeball.

Science and Society

Institutionalized hearsay – no, we still don’t know what’s really going on!

I just read in my local news paper that the US’s war on terror has failed to weaken al Qaeda.

Interesting, I thought, and read on, just to find out that someone had made a survey of some 20 000 people in 23 countries around the world, asking them if the war on terror had weakened al Qaeda.

I managed to track down the survey to a company called Globescan. The actual survey can be found here. This survey seems rather scientific. They have a methodology page, where an account for how the data was collected for each of the involved countries, can be found in a table.

Interestingly enough, in more than half of the countries included interviews have been conducted face-to-face, suggesting the sample was only semi random, if even that. Most likely the interviewers asked people passing by in a market place, supermarket, or some other place, and since a random sample of the country’s population is less than likely to pass them in the hours or days they conducted the interviews, the sample for that country was not random. (Which in turn skews the result; imagine if only moms between 20 and 30 were asked this question, as opposed to everyone in the country, and then we’re not even discussing the difference between face-to-face and telephone interviews when it comes to interviewer influence errors.)

It is also possible to find the actual questions asked on the methodology page. One that stands out is the question “Overall would you say your feelings about al Qaeda are positive, negative or mixed?”

Imagine that question being posed to someone on a street in Egypt, Indonesia, or Pakistan (face-to-face interviews) and then imagine if the interviewee would be honest or not with respect to the far from negligible chance of being overheard…

The actual question probably quoted by my local news paper (and many like it, I’ve been able to gather) was probably “Do you think what US leaders refer to as the ‘war on terror’ has made al Qaeda stronger, weaker, or has had no effect either way?”

This question was not posed to prime ministers of the countries included in the survey, neither were it posed to members of the intelligence community or the military (at least not solely, as far as the methodology page of the survey reveals), instead the you’s and me’s of these countries were asked about the progress of the war on terror.

The question in itself is a potent and interesting one. The method to find the answer quite frankly sucks! The first question in the survey, if the interviewee was positive or not towards al Qaeda is interesting given it had been posed in a situation where anonymity were assured and spectator influence limited. Other questions trying to determine the interviewee’s personal experience and relation to the war on terror would have been interesting, but the attempt to try to make average Joe determine if the war was effective or not is, if I’m really nice, plain dumb.

However, as a survey this one is scientific and within parameters (even though I would have wanted more information on methodology). Unfortunately this kind of research (and others like it, there are other gems dealing with the war in Iraq in basically the same way, to mention one), dealing with these kinds of questions, does not exist in a vacuum.

Journalists will read these surveys and make headlines from them. You and I will read these articles and draw conclusions. We will bring them with us when we vote the next time, when we plan our vacations, and go about our lives (okay not always but now and then we will make decisions remembering “that article” about the war in Iraq or the war on terror), and most of the time we won’t have the background or know the methodology, and in light of that I believe these kinds of questions should not be asked in this way.

Globescan calls their activity reputation research, I think of it as institutionalized hearsay. With the kind help of these guys we can have what Bob next door has been saying for years served to us as a Survey, based on more than X-thousand interviews in so-and-so many countries. What a glorious example of statistics once more abused as a tool for spreading FUD.

To all of you who read about this survey and drew your own conclusions from it, I can only say this: No, we still don’t know what’s really going on!

Computers, Science and Society

Using Statistical Analysis to Create Intrusion Detection

Professor Avishai Wool presents a system that protects GNU/Linux machines from intrusion and malicious program code by using statistical analysis and policy files defining a programs normal behavior, and if that program deviates from said behavior the system stops it.

Since the analysis is hooked into standard GNU/Linux build tools and uses the source code to derive the policy the system is said to guarantee zero false positives. A system of this type is cited to be able to perform protection from threats long before traditional anti virus solutions has categorized them, and with far less penalty to system performance.

Here’s a list of links for further reading:

Humor, Science and Society

How to make US lawmakers realize the crisis is for real…

The two news items (1 and 2) depicted to the right arrived in my news reader at the same time. This may be the most truthful testimony to the inner workings of the bank crisis and the possibly incoming recession. It gives us, the rest of the world, a ballpark idea of what needs to happen in the US before lawmakers over there realize they have to stand up to their responsibilities.

Then again, had they made laws keeping control over activities in board rooms, by middle management and brookers in general they might not have had to vote on a $700 bn bailout plan in the first place… perhaps?

Oh, well… 8-/