Planet Hilker: Tech

20 March 2009 0502h

Attorney General Eric Holder today issued new guidelines (PDF) on federal agency implementation of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The guidelines were issued pursuant to a directive issued by President Obama on January 21, his first full day in office. Like the Obama directive itself, the Holder guidelines express strong support for government transparency and establish a presumption in favor of disclosure of information requested under FOIA.

Perhaps most notably, the new guidelines rescind the so-called Ashcroft memo, issued by the former Attorney General in October 2001. That directive -- widely criticized within the open government community -- encouraged agencies to resist disclosure of requested information and to release documents "only after full and deliberate consideration" of the potential harms that might result. The Ashcroft memo also assured agencies that the Justice Department would defend in court any decisions to withhold information "unless they lack a sound legal basis."

The new Holder guidelines echo the more pro-disclosure policy of former Attorney General Janet Reno and, like the Reno directive, encourage agencies to make "discretionary" disclosures of information that is not clearly required to be withheld as a matter of law. The new guidelines provide:

First, an agency should not withhold information simply because it may do so legally. I strongly encourage agencies to make discretionary disclosures of information. An agency should not withhold records merely because it can demonstrate, as a technical matter, that the records fall within the scope of a FOIA exemption.

Second, whenever an agency determines that it cannot make full disclosure of a requested record, it must consider whether it can make partial disclosure. Agencies should always be mindful that the FOIA requires them to take reasonable steps to segregate and release nonexempt information. Even if some parts of a record must be withheld, other parts either may not be covered by a statutory exemption, or may be covered only in a technical sense unrelated to the actual impact of disclosure.

On the issue of defending agencies whose withholding decisions have been challenged in court, Attorney General Holder also returns to the Reno standard and directs that DOJ "will defend a denial of a FOIA request only if (1) the agency reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest protected by one of the statutory exemptions, or (2) disclosure is prohibited by law." This policy will apply to cases currently pending in the federal courts:

With regard to litigation pending on the date of the issuance of this memorandum, this guidance should be taken into account and applied if practicable when, in the judgment of the Department of Justice lawyers handling the matter and the relevant agency defendants, there is a substantial likelihood that application of the guidance would result in a material disclosure of additional information.

The impact of the Holder guidelines on pending FOIA lawsuits is of particular interest to EFF. As we've previously noted, we have filed motions in several of our FOIA cases asking the courts to delay further proceedings until the new guidelines are issued and the defendant agencies can consider the impact of the new pro-disclosure policies of the Obama administration.

With the issuance of today's guidelines, both the President and the Attorney General have articulated an extremely pro-transparency policy for the federal government. The fact that these pronouncements come so early in the life of the new administration is a particularly promising development. But, as they say, the proof is in the pudding and it remains to be seen if these proclamations from on high produce real results down in the bureaucratic trenches. We will soon learn in our pending lawsuits whether the new administration is truly prepared to reverse the pro-secrecy practices of the Bush administration.

by sobel at 20 March 2009 0245h

Anyone that has attempted to keep a close eye on the work of Congress has experienced the frustration of seeing attempts to sneak new language into a bill hours before a vote, or, as we saw often in the fight against the FISA Amendments Act, seeing legislators disappear behind closed doors during critical moments of a debate. Recently, we watched carefully during the stimulus bill debate for a rumored amendment seeking to allow ISPs to apply copyright filters to customers' Internet connections. And today, Paul Blumenthal at the Sunlight Foundation posted examples of legislators being blindsided by last-minute conference committee changes to the stimulus bill -- changes that allegedly allowed bailout-recipient A.I.G. to issue massive bonuses to executives. During these episodes, the machinery of power is driven behind closed doors, where even legislators are prevented from inspecting the process for errors or corruption.

The Sunlight Foundation's ReadTheBill.org is pushing for a simple solution: Congress should post all bills online 72 hours before before they are debated. With such a rule in place, members of the public would be able to inspect legislation and have a real chance to express their feelings to their elected representatives. As we inspect issues of government transparency and the public's right to know during Sunshine Week, consider signing ReadTheBill.org's simple petition encouraging Congress to take the commonsense step of allowing everyone to read and consider bills before they're made into laws -- not after.

by richard at 19 March 2009 2236h

Three nights ago, my encryption algorithm Blowfish was mentioned on the Fox show 24. The clip is available here, or streaming on Hulu. This is the exchange:

Janis Gold: I isolated the data Renee uploaded to Bauer but I can't get past the filed header.

Larry Moss: What does that mean?

JG: She encrypted the name and address she used and I can't seem to crack it.

LM: Who can?

JG: She used her personal computer. This is very serious encryption. I mean, there are some high-level people who can do it.

LM: Like who?

JG: Chloe O'Brian, but from what you told me earlier she's too loyal to Bauer.

LM: Is her husband still here?

JG: Yes, he's waiting to see you.

LM: He's a level 6 analyst too.

...

JG: Mr. O'Brian, a short time ago one of our agents was in touch with Jack Bauer. She sent a name and address that we assume is his next destination. Unfortunately, it's encrypted with Blowfish 148 and no one here knows how to crack that. Therefore, we need your help, please.

...

Morris O'Brian: Show me the file.

MO: Where's your information. 16 or 32 bit wavelength word length?

JG: 32.

MO: Native or modified data points?

JG: Native.

MO: The designer of this algorithm built a backdoor into his code. Decryption's a piece of cake if you know the override codes.

LM: And you do?

MO: Yeah.

LM: Will this take long?

MO: Course not.

LM: Mr. O'Brian, can you tell me specifically when you'll have the file decrypted?

MO: Yes.

MO: Now.

O'Brian spends just over 30 seconds at the keyboard.

This is the second time Blowfish has appeared on the show. It was broken the first time, too.

by schneier at 19 March 2009 1818h

Along with opening blister packages, removing product labels from items is an unavoidable annoyance of contemporary life. After years of scratching with my fingernails and scraping with a sharpened tongue depressor (works well, dulls easily), I’ve discovered the ultimate solution: ScrapeRite Plastic Razor Blades, double-edged plastic blades designed for light scraping, not cutting. The blades are available in three materials of varying hardness; my experience is with their General Purpose Blades, the softest of the three, which is said to have the consistency of a fingernail and are relatively safe to use on just about any surface, including the paint on your car.

Two years of experience validates these claims: I've used mine on everything from a stainless steel soup pot and wooden cutting board to countless items from Home Depot or Lowe's. I use mine a few times a month and I'm still on my first blade. The two blades of harder, more rigid compounds are supposed stand up to rougher use, such as paint removal on glass, but may scratch delicate surfaces. Their main advantage over razor blades appears to be safety. (note: I have no experience with these blades).

While the plastic razor blades will fit into most standard blade holders, for around-the-home use, I use the manufacturer's inexpensive and compact plastic holder, which I store under a rubber band stretched around a bottle of Goo Gone. Since I still use my standard metal holder with razor blades for glass, I see no reason to buy an extra standard holder for these blades.

ScrapeRite Plastic Razor Blades
$4 (for 5 pack w/ holder)

Manufactured by Composite Blades, Inc.

Available from Amazon

Related Entries:
Snap Blade Knife Testors Hobby Knife OpenX Dual-Blade Package Opener

19 March 2009 1648h

Interesting paper:

Fingerprinting Blank Paper Using Commodity Scanners

Will Clarkson, Tim Weyrich, Adam Finkelstein, Nadia Heninger, Alex Halderman, and Edward W. Felten

Abstract: This paper presents a novel technique for authenticating physical documents based on random, naturally occurring imperfections in paper texture. We introduce a new method for measuring the three-dimensional surface of a page using only a commodity scanner and without modifying the document in any way. From this physical feature, we generate a concise fingerprint that uniquely identifies the document. Our technique is secure against counterfeiting and robust to harsh handling; it can be used even before any content is printed on a page. It has a wide range of applications, including detecting forged currency and tickets, authenticating passports, and halting counterfeit goods. Document identification could also be applied maliciously to de-anonymize printed surveys and to compromise the secrecy of paper ballots.

by schneier at 19 March 2009 1207h

Earlier this week, we published a list of missing documents related to the NSA warrantless surveillance program as part of EFF's celebration of Sunshine Week, and began to analyze what some of these missing documents might be.

Today, we continue by examining the context surrounding an intriguing 2002 memo known as OLC 129. According to a declaration filed by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury:

OLC 129 [is] a nine-page memorandum, dated October 11, 2002, from a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in OLC to the Attorney General prepared in response to a request for OLC’s views concerning the legality of certain communications intelligence activities.

In October 2002, John Yoo was the only Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) who was read-in to the Program, and John Ashcroft was the Attorney General.

Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell noted in a letter to Senator Specter that the “details of the activities [of the NSA program] changed in certain respects over time and I understand from the Department of Justice these activities rested on different legal bases."

This memo was written almost a year after the initial memos on the Program, and its timing does not fit a pattern of regular reviews. The most recent NSA surveillance memo prior this one was the February 8, 2002 Memo to the Department of Defense about "the legality of certain hypothetical activities," and the next most recent was two-page memo from January 2002 "which relates to the Attorney General’s review of the legality of the President’s order authorizing the TSP in the course of considering that program’s reauthorization." This suggests that, in October 2002, there was a new question arising from the Program's operation.

Former Senator Graham was the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee until January 3, 2003, and attended at least four briefings on the NSA surveillance program, starting in October 2001. According to the Washington Post, Graham said that Administration briefers told him in October 2002 that President Bush had authorized the NSA to tap into the stream of global telecommunications passing through junctions on U.S. territory, allowing the NSA to intercept “conversations that . . . went through a transit facility inside the United States.”

When interviewed on CNN Situation Room, Graham explained:

the meeting that I attended focused on the fact that there were telephone communications from one foreign site to another that were now being sent, transited through the United States. … The question was, could the NSA collect those intercepts, since technically they were inside the United States. The administration felt they should be able to do so.

On October 17, 2002, NSA Director Michael Hayden said in testimony that "last week we cemented a deal with another corporate giant to jointly develop a system to mine data that helps us learn about our targets."

Kim Zetter reported in Salon that "[i]n a pivotal network operations center in metropolitan St. Louis, AT&T has maintained a secret, highly secured room since 2002 where government work is being conducted. ... details provided by the two former workers about the Bridgeton room bear the distinctive earmarks of an operation run by the National Security Agency, according to two intelligence experts with extensive knowledge of the NSA and its operations."

As set forth in a declaration by former AT&T employee Mark Klein, the NSA began preparing AT&T employees for a “special job” in 2002. AT&T’s document setting forth the procedure for splitting fiber optic cable into the “SG3 Secure Room” at the Folsom Street Facility was written on December 10, 2002. In January 2003, AT&T finished creating the SG3 Secure Room, and wrote two more documents providing “cut in and test procedure” for the fiber optic splitter. The work order for the San Francisco room came from AT&T's Bridgeton network operations center.

OLC 129 could shed critical light on the legal analysis behind the dragnet surveillance program where the nation’s telecommunications companies violated the law and the privacy of their customers by collaborating with the government in a massive, illegal program to wiretap and data-mine Americans' communications. We urge the Obama Administration to release this memo.

by kurt at 19 March 2009 0728h

Former CNET blogger Chris Soghoian has produced some of the best coverage on the issue of privacy for users of government websites. His
http://news.cnet.com/8300-13739_3-46-1.html?tag=mncol">
http://news.cnet.com/8300-13739_3-46-1.html?tag=mncol">work on the use of YouTube cookies and other tracking technologies on whitehouse.gov brought public attention to the issue, and inspired EFF to get involved.

Beyond informing the public, Soghoian's work in this area has arguably had positive effects on policy. The Obama team has made several commendable adjustments to their privacy and video hosting policies including adding a prominent link to their privacy policy and using YouTube's new "delayed cookies" functionality-- results that seem related, at least in time, to Soghoian's sustained coverage of the issue.

It comes as a surprise, then, to hear that CNET will no longer carry Soghoian's blog. While Soghoian's confrontational style and irreverent approach may have been factors, it appears the decision to drop his blog largely stems from a minor kerfuffle over a headline. A Soghoian post initially titled "White House Ditches YouTube After Privacy Complaints" brought loud denials from the YouTube and the Obama team. The Obama folks belatedly said that their use of non-YouTube video was only an experiment, a possibility that Soghoian mentioned in his article.

If companies like CNET want the energy and edginess of bloggers like Soghoian — who did real research and reporting instead of just republishing or commenting on the work of others — they need to be willing to support them when that same edge sparks a backlash from powerful forces. Without such backbone, it's hard to see how Internet news sources will ever be able to fill the shoes of the rapidly disappearing print media empires.

Meanwhile, the problem of cookies and other tracking technologies on government sites remains. We're looking forward to reading Soghoian's continuing coverage of it on his new blog, Slight Paranoia — already he has blogged about his development of a Firefox add-on that installs opt-out cookies for most of the major targeted advertising networks. And we hope that CNET, along with other media, will continue to cover the story and keep the pressure on YouTube and the White House to protect the privacy of those using government websites.

by hugh at 18 March 2009 1850h

The Bayer company is refusing to talk about a fatal accident at a West Virginia plant, citing a 2002 terrorism law.

CSB had intended to hear community concerns, gather more information on the accident, and inform residents of the status of its investigation. However, Bayer attorneys contacted CSB Chairman John Bresland and set up a Feb. 12 conference at the board's Washington, D.C., headquarters. There, they warned CSB not to reveal details of the accident or the facility's layout at the community meeting.

"This is where it gets a little strange," Bresland tells C&EN. To justify their request, Bayer attorneys cited the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, an antiterrorism law that requires companies with plants on waterways to develop security plans to minimize the threat of a terrorist attack. Part of the plans can be designated as "sensitive security information" that can be disseminated only on a "need-to-know basis." Enforcement of the act is overseen by the Coast Guard and covers some 3,200 facilities, including 320 chemical and petrochemical facilities. Among those facilities is the Bayer plant.

Bayer argued that CSB's planned public meeting could reveal sensitive plant-specific security information, Bresland says, and therefore would be a violation of the maritime transportation law. The board got cold feet and canceled the meeting.

Bresland contends that CSB wasn't agreeing with Bayer, but says it was better to put off the meeting than to hold it and be unable to answer questions posed by the public.

The board then met with Coast Guard officials, Bresland says, and formally canceled the community meeting. The outcome of the Coast Guard meeting remains murky. It is unclear what role the Coast Guard might have in editing or restricting release of future CSB reports of accidents at covered facilities, the board says. "This could really cause difficulties for us," Bresland says. "We could find ourselves hemming and hawing about what actually happened in an accident."

This isn't the first time that the specter of terrorism has been used to keep embarrassing information secret.

by schneier at 18 March 2009 1845h

Pelican claims their cases are waterproof, crushproof and dustproof. I have no reason to believe otherwise. I’ve dropped my 1750 weapons case countless times, driven in the rain with it in the back of my truck, and generally beaten it up. The inside always stays completely dry and it shows little sign of wear.

I mostly go duck hunting in Louisiana, so my heavy outdoor use is mostly seasonal, but even indoors you want something you can trust. When you spend a lot of money on a gun (like the Browning shotgun I own), you want it to last. In the past I've used soft cases, but I have friends who have always hailed Pelicans as the highest quality gun cases they owned.

After six months, I am completely convinced this polypropylene hard case is the last case I will ever need. Just holding it in your hand you can feel how durable it is, yet still light weight enough to be
manageable (about 26 lbs w/the foam). It also comes with a foam interior liner that is customizable so everything fits snug. In terms of safety, the 1750's padlock holes are protected with stainless steel panels. The case even comes with an unconditional lifetime guarantee, though Pelican's construction and quality seemingly deem it unnecessary.

Since purchasing this case, I’ve picked up a Pelican Micro Case, which works equally as well. Perfect for keeping a cell phone, wallet and keys dry.

-- Steven Domingue

While equipping a cryonics response team that has to carry all kinds of fragile equipment as checked airline baggage, I sampled four or five different brands of containers. We concluded without any doubt that the Pelicans were the best, and they also tend to be the cheapest, so long as you aren't tempted to buy them with the overpriced foam inserts. It's much more economical and more satisfying to buy polyurethane foam separately (e.g. from upholstery stores) and cut it to fit the objects which you want to protect. A bread knife with fine serrations is good for cutting foam; a utility knife is not good; a band saw with a thin blade is the best of all.

I've lugged Pelicans through all kinds of punishing conditions, and have never seen one experience any damage. They are heavier than aluminum equipment cases, but they don't dent, crack, bend, or break.

-- Charles Platt

Pelican Weapons Case - 1750
$188
Available from Ralph's Pelican Cases

Or $218 from Amazon

Pelican Micro Case - 1020
$12
Available from Ralph's Pelican Cases

Or $20 from Amazon

Manufactured by Pelican

Related Entries:
Pelican Memory Card Cases Otterbox Panasonic Toughbooks

18 March 2009 1701h

Interesting piece of cryptographic history: a cipher designed by Robert Patterson and sent to Thomas Jefferson. The full story is behind a paywall.

by schneier at 18 March 2009 1322h

Yesterday, we published a list of missing documents related to the NSA warrantless surveillance program as part of EFF's celebration of Sunshine Week, and began to analyze what some of these missing documents might be.

Today, we turn to a document known as OLC 62. According to a declaration filed by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury:

OLC 62 [is] a February 8, 2002, memorandum from a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in OLC to the General Counsel of another federal agency, prepared in response to a request for OLC views regarding the legality of certain hypothetical activities.

Since OLC 62 is a document from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking documents about the NSA warrantless wiretapping program, we know that the memo dealt with that subject. At the time, John Yoo was the only Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) who was cleared for the NSA Program, indicating he was the author.

On March 2, 2009, the DOJ released a memo, dated January 15, 2009, that rescinded a February 8, 2002, memo from OLC Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo to William J. Haynes II, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense. It would be quite a coincidence if this was not a reference to the same memo.

The January 15, 2009, memo was written by Bradbury. Bradbury describes the February 8, 2002, memo as incorrectly asserting that Congress did not include a clear statement that FISA overrode the president’s “inherent” authority to conduct warrantless wiretapping, citing page 13. This indicates is it at least 13 pages long.

The January 15, 2009, memo redacts the subject of the February 8, 2002, memo, citing to “Re: [Classified Matter].” Thus, while we know that the February 8, 2002, memo dealt with the so-called inherent authority for the Executive to conduct warrantless wiretapping in violation of FISA, we do not know what the “certain hypothetical activities” were. However, the use of the term “hypothetical” suggests that, on February 8, 2002, the activities were not yet operational.

There are a couple of interesting Department of Defense surveillance initiatives around that time that one would expect the DOD to seek legal advice before conducting. One is the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, which was established at the Department of Defense (DOD) in January 2002. (See DOD’s Executive Summary).

Another is the DOD’s Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA). On February 19, 2002, the DOD issued, DOD 5105.67, a directive establishing CIFA. (See National Security Archive’s Electronic Briefing Book on CIFA).

Both TIA and CIFA have since been shut down.

The public deserves to know about the programs that the DOD considered in reliance on John Yoo’s flawed (and subsequently withdrawn) legal analysis. We urge the Obama Administration to release this memo.

by kurt at 18 March 2009 0811h

The battle to control online music has taken a particularly outrageous turn. As if private censorship, fines, intimidation and blacklisting weren't enough, now the Department of Justice — for the first time we're aware of — is threatening to throw a man in jail for noncommercial music-sharing.1

At issue is a pre-release leak of the Guns N' Roses album Chinese Democracy. In August 2008, blogger Kevin Cogill was arrested at gunpoint at his home in Los Angeles. He was charged under the 2005 Family Entertainment and Copyright Act with posting tracks from the album prior to its release date. In October, Cogill plead guilty [PDF], and last week the government asked for a six-month prison sentence.

The sentencing request [PDF] misconstrues the facts and technology in question.

At the heart of the DOJ's case is the assumption that Cogill was the original source of the album leak, and therefore bears full responsibility for every subsequent download of the album until its official release in November 2008.

In fact, it appears that leaks of the tracks in question had been available for many years before Cogill posted his copies in June 2008. As noted in Cogill's lawyer's response to the request [PDF], the band began work on the album in 1994 (!), and switched studio affiliations and band managers several times in the subsequent 15 years before its release, leaving countless opportunities for leaks. Anecdotal evidence exists of CD leaks "kicking around since 2001 or 2002."

A quick search of popular bittorrent trackers reveals that a torrent of many of the tracks in question was available in March of 2007, a full 13 months before Cogill's supposed initial leak.

While Cogill did post copies of the tracks (received from an anonymous source on "internet chat") to his music blog Antiquiet in June 2008, the post would have had little or no impact on the global availability of leaked copies. The tracks were posted for streaming-only, with no direct-download link. They were available for only twenty minutes before the website crashed and the files were removed.

It's true that it would have theoretically been possible for someone to rip all nine tracks into MP3s during those twenty minutes. But, because the album had been available through other channels for so long, it's improbable that anyone would even bother to attempt ripping the Antiquiet streams, and certain that it would have made no difference in the album's availability even if someone did.

Of course, it's easy to see why the DOJ (and the RIAA, the real motivating force behind the prosecution) ignore all this. By casting Cogill as the master-leaker, they can attempt to saddle him with responsibility for 375,376 illegal file downloads and $2,236,500 in damages to RIAA member companies. (See David Kravets' excellent article in Threat Level for a breakdown of the ridiculous mathematics at work here.) The flaws in these conclusions are familiar to Deeplinks readers: Not every download constitutes a lost sale. Many industry experts believe pre-release leaks actually increase sales. The RIAA has a long history of playing make-believe with the costs of music piracy. Too bad the DOJ has wasted your tax dollar playing the same game.

The judge in this case, however, can opt-out of the game. We urge the judge not to add jail time to the long list of unreasonable penalties for sharing music.

1. 1. The only thing close to precedent we're aware of was in 2006, when two men pled guilty in Tennessee to advance-leaking a Ryan Adams album. Those charges carried a maximum penalty of one year in prison, but the leakers ultimately were sentenced only to two months' house arrest and two years' probation. We're not sure what penalty the DOJ requested prior to final sentencing.

by tim at 17 March 2009 1921h

It happens; sometimes they die.

"Death by hyperthermia" is the official designation. When it happens to young children, the facts are often the same: An otherwise loving and attentive parent one day gets busy, or distracted, or upset, or confused by a change in his or her daily routine, and just... forgets a child is in the car. It happens that way somewhere in the United States 15 to 25 times a year, parceled out through the spring, summer and early fall.

It's a fascinating piece of reporting, with some interesting security aspects. We protect against a common risk, and increase the chances of a rare risk:

Two decades ago, this was relatively rare. But in the early 1990s, car-safety experts declared that passenger-side front airbags could kill children, and they recommended that child seats be moved to the back of the car; then, for even more safety for the very young, that the baby seats be pivoted to face the rear.

There is a theory of why we forget something so important: dropping off the baby is routine:

The human brain, he says, is a magnificent but jury-rigged device in which newer and more sophisticated structures sit atop a junk heap of prototype brains still used by lower species. At the top of the device are the smartest and most nimble parts: the prefrontal cortex, which thinks and analyzes, and the hippocampus, which makes and holds on to our immediate memories. At the bottom is the basal ganglia, nearly identical to the brains of lizards, controlling voluntary but barely conscious actions.

Diamond says that in situations involving familiar, routine motor skills, the human animal presses the basal ganglia into service as a sort of auxiliary autopilot. When our prefrontal cortex and hippocampus are planning our day on the way to work, the ignorant but efficient basal ganglia is operating the car; that's why you'll sometimes find yourself having driven from point A to point B without a clear recollection of the route you took, the turns you made or the scenery you saw.

There are technical solutions:

In 2000, Chris Edwards, Terry Mack and Edward Modlin began to work on just such a product after one of their colleagues, Kevin Shelton, accidentally left his 9-month-old son to die in the parking lot of NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The inventors patented a device with weight sensors and a keychain alarm. Based on aerospace technology, it was easy to use; it was relatively cheap, and it worked.

Janette Fennell had high hopes for this product: The dramatic narrative behind it, she felt, and the fact that it came from NASA, created a likelihood of widespread publicity and public acceptance.

That was five years ago. The device still isn't on the shelves. The inventors could not find a commercial partner willing to manufacture it. One big problem was liability. If you made it, you could face enormous lawsuits if it malfunctioned and a child died. But another big problem was psychological: Marketing studies suggested it wouldn't sell well.

The problem is this simple: People think this could never happen to them.

There's talk of making this a mandatory safety feature, but nothing about the cost per lives saved. (In general, a regulatory goal is between $1 million and $10 million per life saved.)

And there's the question of whether someone who accidentally leaves a baby in the car, resulting in the baby's death, should be prosecuted as a criminal.

by schneier at 17 March 2009 1910h

Wielded by fire and rescue workers everywhere, the Halligan Bar is the best door-smashing, get-me-the-heck-into/outta-here, zombie-fightin’ tool in the world. The deluxe 30-inch one I have (pic above) is made of high tensile strength titanium, so it will never rust and, despite its imposing appearance, weighs just 5.25 lbs. It even has eyelets for a strap! (note: less exorbitant Halligans are available in alloy steel; my titanium bar was a gift).

So far I've only used mine to do three things: hook one end over a bathroom stall to do pull ups, carry it as a hobo's bindle stick and impress people on my walk home from work. Nevertheless, I live in a 17-story apartment building (technically 16). Simply knowing I own one puts my mind at ease. Did you ever hear the story of the maintenance guy on 9/11 who hacked his way through a wall using a squeegee? With something as obscenely strong and useful as a Halligan Bar, he'd have been out in seconds.

I keep mine leaning against the wall in the corner, where it waits for the day when I need to smash into or out of something... or I hear screams of "He's trapped inside!" or "The Zombies are here!"

Halligan Bar
$195 (30-inch, alloy steel)
Available from All Hands Fire Equipment

$555 (30-inch, titanium)
Available from Tico Titanium

Related Entries:
Personal Safety Emergency Pack FuBar Demolition Tool Japanese Tiger Paw/Pry Bar

17 March 2009 1655h

Philadelphia - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged a U.S. appeals court Monday to block the government's repeated attempts to seize cell phone location information -- a record of where the cell phone user travels throughout each day -- without a warrant in violation of communications privacy statutes and the Constitution.

In September of last year, a federal court affirmed that location information stored by a mobile phone provider is legally protected and that a judge can and should require law enforcement to show probable cause in order to access the stored data. However, the government appealed that decision to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Cell phone providers store an extraordinary amount of data about where you are when making or receiving a call, based on the cell towers your phone uses. In the amicus brief filed Monday, EFF argues that Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Fourth Amendment protect this location information from unfettered search and seizure.

"The government argues that federal law requires judges to approve their applications for location information from cell phone companies -- even if the police don't have probable cause to obtain this sensitive information," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. "Courts have the right under statute -- and the duty under the Constitution -- to demand that the government obtain a search warrant before seizing this private location data."

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU Foundation of Pennsylvania, and the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) joined EFF's brief.

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/celltracking/Filed%20Cell%20Tracking%2...

For more on cell phone tracking:
http://www.eff.org/issues/cell-tracking

Contact:

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

by rebecca at 17 March 2009 1448h

As part of EFF's celebration of Sunshine Week, we're providing a list of missing documents related to the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program. As a result of various Freedom of Information Act lawsuits and Congressional investigations, the government has provided information about the existence of various memoranda and other documents that are responsive to requests for information about the NSA Program. News media reports and books have revealed the existence of additional documents. We’ve combed through a wide variety of sources, and created a list of known NSA surveillance documents that have yet to see the sunshine. To provide some context, we have also included a few released documents in the list.

We hope that President Obama's committment to transparency and accountability means that we will soon find the truth behind these documents. In the mean time, the list of missing documents provide information about the general subject, the timing and/or the participants to the communication, which is sufficient information to begin analysis of the potential content of the memos based on known information available from other sources. For the remainder of Sunshine Week, we will be writing a series of blog posts, highlighting particular missing documents, and providing the context that surrounds the document.

Today, we start with an October 20, 2001 memo known as FBI 7. According to a declaration filed by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury:

FBI 7 is a one-page memorandum, dated October 20, 2001, from the Attorney General to the Director of the FBI, advising the Director that certain intelligence collection activities are legal and have been appropriately authorized.

When this memo was written, John Ashcroft was the Attorney General and Robert Mueller was the FBI Director (on the job since September 4, 2001).

After John Yoo completed the legal analysis purportedly supporting warrantless wiretapping on October 4, 2001, the Program went operational on October 6. See Summary of Evidence, filed in the NSA surveillance litigation (p. 6); May 18, 2006 Gen. Hayden Confirmation Hearing (p. 62).

The Program did not stay secret for long. Eric Lichtblau reported in Bush’s Law that “[w]ithin twelve hours of its inception … the program’s cover was blown. It happened at the FBI [where a] technician stumbled on to … an NSA operation. More troubling still, there was no court order to be found.” Eric Lichtblau, Bush’s Law (p. 137).

Worried about the legality, the FBI ran the issue of the warrantless operation up the chain of command until it landed “finally at the desk of the FBI director. … It’s okay, Director Mueller told [Deputy Director] Pickard. The NSA operation had been approved at the highest level; everything was in order.” Eric Lichtblau, Bush’s Law (p. 138).

After the warrantless wiretapping story broke, the New York Times reported that the FBI was uncomfortable about the leads generated by the NSA program:

As the bureau was running down those leads [in 2001], its director, Robert S. Mueller III, raised concerns about the legal rationale for a program of eavesdropping without warrants, one government official said. Mr. Mueller asked senior administration officials about 'whether the program had a proper legal foundation,' but deferred to Justice Department legal opinions, the official said.

FBI 7 is only a one-page document. Given how much space is generally devoted on government memos to the header and the signature line, there is not much room for left any legal analysis. Instead, this appears to be a simple, conclusory note, asserting that the NSA Program was legal. Yet, two years later, Mueller and the top leadership of the DOJ were prepared to resign over the illegality of the Program. Summary of Evidence (pp. 41-46). This document is a significant document in the history of the illegal warrantless wiretapping program and we urge the Obama Administration to release it.

Please support EFF's continuing fight against government secrecy.

by kurt at 17 March 2009 0715h

Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today urged the United States Sentencing Commission to reject modifications to federal sentencing guidelines that would require extra prison time for people who use technology that hides one's identity or location.

Under current rules, a criminal defendant can get additional time added to a prison sentence if he used "sophisticated means" to commit the offense. In its testimony before the commission, EFF will argue that sentencing courts should not assume that using proxies -- technologies that can anonymize users or mask their location -- is a mark of sophistication. In fact, proxies are widely employed by corporate IT departments and public libraries and, like many computer applications, can be used with little or no knowledge on the part of the user.

"It would be a serious mistake for the United States Sentencing Commission to establish a presumption that using a common technology is worthy of additional punishment," said Jennifer Granick, EFF Civil Liberties Director. "Whether or not a convicted person's use of a proxy is worthy of increased penalties is a case-by-case determination most appropriately made by a court."

"While proxies may be an advanced technology, using a proxy is often no more difficult than using Microsoft Word," said Seth Schoen, EFF Staff Technologist. "Many kinds of people use proxies for all sorts of legitimate purposes, so only a court can reliably assess which uses are truly employed as a 'sophisticated means' of committing a crime and which are for privacy, free speech or some other innocent purpose."

Schoen will testify about EFF's comments at the Sentencing Commission's public hearing on March 17th in Washington, D.C.

For the full testimony:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/ussc-schoen-statement.pdf

For more on the hearing:
http://www.ussc.gov/AGENDAS/20090317/Public_Hearing.htm

Contacts:

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
press@eff.org

by rebecca at 17 March 2009 0703h

Way back in the 70s and decades before, too, hundreds of us tried lots of ways of heating water with sunlight. Some schemes worked fine at first, but later succumbed to failures of materials and technique. Some defiantly produced only lukewarm water available only at awkward hours. Some defied the laws of physics and didn’t work at all. A few exploded. It wasn’t long before it was common to see deteriorating solar water heaters perched disconsolately on rooftops, abandoned by humiliated, exasperated owners.

Time to try again! This inspiringly-comprehensive book presents what has been learned the hard way over the past 30 years or so. Clear illustrations—many in color—show the layouts that have proved to be the best in every way. Recommended hardware is here complete with brand name and even the part numbers. Here are the most effective pipe sizes and materials and why they are chosen. Classic mistakes are attended along with their corrections. Cautions are noted; success is celebrated.

My experience in the field and 25 years at the Whole Earth Catalog tells me that every aspect has been well covered and detailed. If you follow the recommendations, your solar hot water system will be sure to work and last a long time. I consider this book as a model for collected experience on other subjects as well.

Note: a black and white version of the book is also available. I recommend the colored version.

PDF download of Chapter 2: Drainback Solar Water Heaters
PDF download of Table of Contents

Solar Hot Water Systems: Lesson Learned 1977 to Today
Tom Lane
2004, 194 pages
$73, or $43 for the black and white (shipping included)
Available from the author via ECS Solar Energy Systems

Or $100 from Amazon

Related Entries:
Home Power Boondock RVing Home Comforts: The Art & Science of Keeping House

16 March 2009 1650h

San Francisco - In celebration of Sunshine Week, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today launched a sophisticated search tool that allows the public to closely examine thousands of pages of documents the organization has pried loose from secretive government agencies. The documents relate to a wide range of cutting-edge technology issues and government policies that affect civil liberties and personal privacy.

EFF's document collection -- obtained through requests and litigation under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) -- casts light on several controversial government initiatives, including the FBI's Investigative Data Warehouse and DCS 3000 surveillance program, and the Department of Homeland Security's Automated Targeting System and ADVISE data-mining project. The documents also provide details on Justice Department collection of communications routing data, Pentagon monitoring of soldiers' blogs, mismatches in the Terrorist Screening Center's watchlist, and FBI misuse of its national security letter subpoena authority.

The new search capability enables visitors to EFF's website to conduct keyword searches across the universe of government documents obtained by EFF, maximizing the value of the material.

"Until recently, documents obtained under FOIA often gathered dust in filing cabinets," said David Sobel, EFF Senior Counsel and director of the organization's FOIA Litigation for Accountable Government (FLAG) Project. "We believe that government information should be widely available and easy to research, and our new search engine makes that a reality."

EFF is launching the tool during national Sunshine Week, an annual, non-partisan event that promotes government transparency. The celebration is particularly significant this year, because it comes after eight years of a presidential administration that was widely criticized for its secrecy and two months into a new administration that has promised "unprecedented" openness.

"We welcomed President Obama's declaration -- on his first full day in office -- that he will work to make the federal government more open and participatory," EFF Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann said. "There's certainly a lot of work to do -- so much government activity has been hidden from public view in the name of 'national security' and the 'war on terror.'"

For the new FOIA document search tool:
http://www.eff.org/issues/foia/search

For more on EFF's FLAG Project:
http://www.eff.org/issues/foia

Contacts:

Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
marcia@eff.org

David Sobel
Senior Counsel
Electronic Frontier Foundation
sobel@eff.org

by richard at 16 March 2009 1317h

The Gentoo embedded team would like to announce that we will be automatically building and releasing stages for ARM and SuperH/SH. We hope these stages will help out people interested in developing embedded linux applications.

On the ARM side, we are currently releasing stages for the following CHOSTs:

• arm-unknown-linux-gnu (old ABI, in progress)
• armv4l-unknown-linux-gnu (old ABI, in progress)
• armv4tl-softfloat-linux-gnueabi (EABI)
• armv5tel-softfloat-linux-gnueabi (EABI)

On the SuperH/SH side, we are currently releasing stages for the following processors:

• sh4
• sh4a

The stages are available under the /releases/arm/autobuilds directory for ARM and /releases/sh/autobuilds for SH at your favorite mirror.

Because building stages for these architectures takes a while, we plan on releasing stages on a monthly or bi-monthly basis. If you would like to talk about Gentoo on those architectures, please join us on #gentoo-embedded @ irc.freenode.net.

We would like to thank QNAP Inc. and Marvell Technology Group for providing us with support and hardware for ARM based chips. However we would like to expand our ARM support to the armv6 and armv7 processors. If you or your company can provide us with some hardware we would greatly appreciate it. Please contact the Gentoo ARM team if you or your company are able to assist us.

We would like to also thank Renesas Technology Corp. who has graciously provided us hardware and support for the SuperH platform.

by Alec Warner at 16 March 2009 0002h

If you're caring for a multitude of critters, the previously-reviewed Merck/Merial Manual for Pet Health is essential. If you've never had a dog or, for whatever reason, never took the time to do your due diligence, the Red Cross' Dog First Aid is an excellent primer and quick emergency guide worth reviewing and keeping handy. Beyond the basics of general care, the guide provides short, clear instructions and photos (plus a DVD) on how to diagnose and tackle everything from choking, pad wounds, anal sac swelling (it happens), constipation, bite wounds, burns and ear infections to frostbite, electric shock (cord bites), parasites and the more esoteric afflictions you hope never to see, like "rectal prolapse." There's also a checklist and instructions on how to assemble the ultimate first aid kit (the list is much longer than I would have imagined).

Our best buddy's been with us for five years and -- *knock wood* -- we've had only one serious emergency, which luckily happened outside the vet's office: anaphylactic shock due to an allergy. As time passes, of course, the chances of potential emergencies and health issues will inevitably increase. I know the little dude appreciates our preparedness.

Dog First Aid: Be Red Cross Ready
Safety Series Vol. 2
2008, 116 pages
$17
Available from American Red Cross

Related Entries:
Petrodex Finger Toothbrush Wysong GlobalPetFinder

13 March 2009 1628h

This fleece hood features an extra long neck and can be volded up within itself to form a variety of useful configurations, including a face guard, gator, scarf and mombo hat (see diagram). Unlike a plain balaclava-style headgear, this has drawstrings which enable it to hug the face exactly as tight as you need in order keep the wind out. I've been using mine for five years to be comfortable outside for long periods of time in the coldest days of a typical Ottawa Winter (-35 Celsius or so). I tend to go for the full-face mode until I want to interact with someone more openly, and then just pull down the face covering (I've become quite conscious of just how much I use my face to communicate). Then if I'm inside for a few minutes I put it in neck-warmer mode.

On its own, the Polar Hood doesn't always provide enough protection from particularly harsh cold and wind, but the crucial service it provides in my winter ensemble is its unmatched facial protection. In the pic below, I'm also wearing my coat's faux-fur hood, along with a Nepalese-style winter hat underneath both hoods. The photo was taken near the beginning of a roughly hour-long walk home in what was apparently -24 Celsius weather, -33 with wind chill. I was happy as a clam the whole walk home.

My hood also served me well snowshoeing last winter. I can't vouch for its usefulness while going downhill at high speeds, but I have used it in pretty high winds. It feels like the wind can cut through the top of the hood easier than it can cut through to the face. In any event, a warm hat underneath the hood turns a previously frost-biting wind into an innocuous and even pleasant breeze.

Taiga and others make a similar, but seemingly more complicated and slightly more expensive version. Since mine is just one piece of material, it is simple to use and easy to clean and dry. When it gets moisture-laden from my breath condensing in it, I just pull it straight and lay it over something and it dries quickly because all its surfaces are exposed.

Polar Hood
$25
Available from Cartom

Related Entries:
Buff Bod-i-Bag Psolar.Ex Cold Weather Face Mask

12 March 2009 1642h

&lt;center&gt;&lt;object width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tprMEs-zfQA&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1"&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tprMEs-zfQA&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"&gt;&lt;/embed&gt;&lt;/object&gt;&lt;/center&gt; &lt;p&gt;So it may well have taken the makers of this amazing remix (and others available at &lt;a href="http://thru-you.com"&gt;Thru-You.com&lt;/a&gt;) more time to make this than it took me to write my book, &lt;a href="http://remix.lessig.org"&gt;REMIX&lt;/a&gt;. But whether or not it did, this is, to borrow the point from my friend &lt;a href="http://www.amazon.com/Search-Jeffersons-Moose-Cyberspace-Current/dp/0195342895"&gt;David Post's fantastic book&lt;/a&gt;, Jefferson's Moose. Watch this, and you'll understand everything and more than what I try to explain in my book.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;(Jefferson's Moose: Post's book is about Jefferson and about cyberspace. He's been toiling to understand both for almost 15 years. The central story of the book was Jefferson's bringing a stuffed moose to Paris, to show the Old World why their theories about nature in the New World were wrong. Words had failed to do the trick. But when one saw the seven foot tall moose in Jefferson's entry way, one could not but recognize that theories about nature being "degenerate" in America were false.)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;This video is Jefferson's Moose. If you come to the Net armed with the idea that the old system of copyright is going to work just fine here, this more than anything is going to get you to recognize: you need some new ideas.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Thank you, ThruYou. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

11 March 2009 1702h

&lt;center&gt;&lt;img src="http://img.skitch.com/20090311-pr5hsi8wnbj8jhdcjb4mxt8ec.jpg" alt="Untitled"/&gt;&lt;/center&gt; &lt;p&gt;President Obama "&lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/11/AR2009031101499.html?hpid=topnews"&gt;announced guidelines aimed at curbing the number of pet projects in appropriations bills&lt;/a&gt;" (aka, earmarks). &lt;/p&gt; </content>

11 March 2009 1702h

&lt;p&gt;More people I admire missing the point (for which, as I've said again and again, I'm happy to take responsibility but which, again and again, begs clarification): this time, &lt;a href="http://michiganmessenger.com/14341/conyers-and-his-critic-play-fast-and-loose-with-the-facts"&gt;Ed Brayton&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Ed says: &lt;blockquote&gt;Lessig is arguing that that the bill is bad policy and that Conyers is being paid off by the publishing industry to get the measure passed.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;No. No. And again, Ed, no. To be "paid off by the publishing industry" is a crime. It's called bribery. To be given a campaign contribution in exchange for introducing or passing legislation is also a crime. Any quid-pro-quo for legislative action is banned six ways to Sunday. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But as I &lt;a href="http://www.lessig.org/blog/2009/03/karl_missing_the_point.html"&gt;said&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://www.lessig.org/blog/2009/03/a_reply_to_congressman_conyers.html"&gt;said&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://www.lessig.org/blog/2009/03/john_conyers_and_open_access.html"&gt;said&lt;/a&gt;, I am not accusing anyone of any crime. I'm not even accusing anyone of anything unethical. My charge is that by (a) introducing legislation that has no good public policy justification behind it and which (b) does not benefit your own constituents while (c) being disproportionately supported in financial contributions by the single industry that would benefit from the legislation, you invite the charge (as 88% of citizens in my district believe) that "money buys results in Congress." WHETHER OR NOT "money bought" this result, you have committed this wrong. The wrong is the relationship, and the suggestion the relationship begs. It is not -- and again, NOT -- that the person accused is "being paid off" by anyone. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;I make this point over and over again in the (now close to 1 billion) talks I've given about "corruption." They're collected at &lt;a href="http://lessig.blip.tv"&gt;lessig.blip.tv&lt;/a&gt;. I understand how it is rational for no one (or very few) to spend the 20 to 60 minute necessary to watch those talks completely. But here's a four minute clip about another popular Democrat. Watch this, and maybe the idea of "good soul corruption" will become clearer.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;center&gt;&lt;embed src="http://blip.tv/play/lG3yvRgA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="399" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"&gt;&lt;/embed&gt;&lt;/center&gt; &lt;p&gt;What could a "good soul" do to avoid the charge of being "good soul corrupt"? Well, the simplest is to make sure the that the only time you introduce legislation that 33 Nobel Prize winning scientists believe would harm science (or the equivalent), it plainly benefits your constituents. A bit more difficult, but certainly appropriate: As a chairman of a committee, refuse to solicit or accept contributions from the interests your committee regulates. And most important, and ultimately: pass legislation that provides for "citizen-funded elections" -- so that when you support legislation with no good public purpose behind it, no one could believe it was because of the money. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;And what could a good soul citizen do to end good soul corruption? Join our &lt;a href="http://strike4change.com"&gt;donor strike&lt;/a&gt; -- &lt;a href="http://strike4change.com"&gt;strike4change.com&lt;/a&gt; -- and thereby refuse to support any federal politician who doesn't support this plainly corrupt system. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

11 March 2009 1702h

While I've always spent a lot of time computing, the precise, all-day cursor movements of professional writing and designing (a recent switch) got me vexed with my previous mouse's lack of control and an aching wrist. After borrowing a friend's $70 trackball and enjoying the fingertip control and comfort, I set out to get tracking at the lowest possible cost and highest possible comfort. I settled on the Logitech Marble Mouse.

Shaped like a low, oval hill, this $20 mouse is a nice inverse of the natural curve of a hand. The trackball sits naturally under the index and middle fingers and moves very smoothly. The sizeable left and right buttons are situated directly under your thumb and ring finger, while the two smaller buttons above them can be designated for a variety of functions like scrolling and zoom. The symmetry also makes it ambidextrous, which is great for any left/right-handed families that share a home computer.

I did try a few thumb-operated trackballs, but a slight weirdness in my right thumb joint causes some discomfort when I move it a lot. Every time I put my hand on the Marble Mouse, I'm able to keep it totally relaxed. The mouse is large enough for comfort, but still relatively small enough to take on the road. The build quality is solid, and it's easy to clean. Best of all, my wrist no longer smarts after a long day's editing.

Bonus: the heavy, low-friction ball makes a nice desk toy when you need a break.

Logitech Marble Mouse
$22

Manufactured by Logitech

Available from Amazon

Related Entries:
MoGo Mouse MS Wireless Notebook Optical Mouse IBM Mini Mouse

11 March 2009 1646h

&lt;p&gt;The usually exactly right Karl Lenz &lt;a href="http://k.lenz.name/LB/?p=133#respond"&gt;writes&lt;/a&gt;: "Is Lessig Shilling Against Open Access?" He laments the "damage done to the goodwill of the other side by this baseless smear."&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;This is missing the point, twice. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The merits of the "open access" argument stand or fall on their own. There was a fear of some (but discounted by others) that Conyers had introduced the bill to enable it to be swept into another bill without further process. Whatever else, given he has now defended the bill to remedy the same lack of process that led to the rule the bill attacks, it is doubtful that will happen. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But I do disagree with to the suggestion this is a "baseless smear." &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;It is a smear, no doubt, in the sense that it is a criticism, not so much of the man, but of a system. It is this system that produces enormous cynicism about how government works. That Conyers receives money from the auto industry and votes with their interests isn't the sort of thing that produces cynicism, just as the fact that Senator Grassley receives money from farmers and votes with their interests isn't the sort of thing that produces cynicism. Those sort of contributions -- and votes -- are the very best one could expect in a system of privately funded elections -- funding that fits the interests of the district; votes that track the interests of the district.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But if there's a very best, there's a very worst -- funding and votes that have nothing to do with the interests of a district. That's what this bill is. Are the votes of the 14th District in Michigan benefitted by a bill that will increase the cost of access to government funded research? Is protecting publishers the principle that got John Conyers elected to Congress? Is this really -- as Lenz suggests -- one of his "convictions"? Is John Conyers really a Congressman who has as a "conviction" the idea that we should pay for scientific research twice? That publishers whose business model conflicts with the best business model for science in the digital age deserve Congress' protection? &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The whole point in this criticism (aka, "smear") was that there was no good reason for the support of this bill beyond doing a favor to an important industry. And to do a favor for an industry by supporting a bill that has no good reason behind it (and 33 Nobel Prize winners, and the current and former head of the NIH against it) while receiving 2x the contributions of those who didn't sponsor the bill is exactly the behavior that produces such cynicism. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;So it is an attack, no doubt. But it is certainly not baseless. "Baseless" would have been to suggest Conyers was bribed. Of course he wasn't -- Conyers is a hero of mine and my kind (libs); we don't believe our heros are criminals. It is instead an attack on precisely the behavior that leads 88% of the people in my district to believe "money buys results" in Congress. Conyers voting to protect GM doesn't produce that cynicism. Conyers voting to protect a bunch of foreign publishers does.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Now if you're someone like me who believes that this cynicism is THE problem in Congress today -- if you believe that eliminating it, by restoring a system that could lead people to believe Congress was doing what it doing because of the voters, or even because of stupidity, but not because of the money, was the most important thing that Congress could do now (and especially now when all the attention that should be focused on the importance of stimulus is now focused instead on 8,000 or more earmarks said to have "larded up" the bill), then what Conyers did is precisely the sort of thing that needs to be attacked. Not just him (we've got others coming). Not just Democrats (we've been criticized already for being too harsh on Republicans). But him and anyone else who gives us a chance to point to the kind of relationship that draws this critical institution into doubt.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But I'll confess, this isn't a role I enjoy. It is my nature (nothing to be proud of, but this is the reality) to ingratiate, not criticize. I don't have the courage of a Stallman. Too many of my cycles are focused on how or whether what I do will affect whether others like me. I am more comfortable on the inside than on the outside. And when we tried to find allies in this battle, I totally understood those who didn't have the stomach for this. "Coward" is a name I've given myself more often than any other. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But I really really mean what I said at the end of the &lt;a href="http://www.lessig.org/blog/2009/03/a_reply_to_congressman_conyers.html"&gt;first post&lt;/a&gt; on this "baseless smear": &lt;blockquote&gt;This is no time to play nice.&lt;/blockquote&gt; Our government is corrupted. That is not to say members accept bribes, or that legislation is the product of a quid-pro-quo: fewer accept bribes today than at any point in our past; I doubt any legislation is the product of a quid-pro-quo. These are good people, in a corrupted system -- a system that doesn't focus where it should (on the views of the citizens of each district) but instead focuses where Members must (on where they need to raise money). &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;No one not benefiting from this system could defend it. Each of us, I believe, has a duty to change it. And change here will require something more than happy, glad-handing, smiles - however miserable that makes wimps like me. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

11 March 2009 1402h

After a week plying a rented aluminum and plastic paddle on a scouting canoe trip, I wondered just how difficult it would be to make my own out of wood. The answer: not too difficult. As this book explains, making a canoe paddle is part woodworking, part sculpture, part whittling and well within the grasp of anyone willing to work patiently. It requires a minimal number of basic tools (consider that Native Americans used very primitive tools to make theirs). Naturally, power tools will speed things up a bit but they aren't required. Ten or fifteen hours of pleasant work will yield a paddle every bit as good as one you can buy.

Canoe Paddles guides the reader through selecting the right material, laying out the pattern and shaping the complex profile of a paddle step by step. Gidmark and Warren explain and illustrate each operation clearly and offer options for using power or hand tools. They include a thorough treatment of the history and function of this deceptively-simple ancient tool to convey to the reader the huge importance of proper paddle geometry. The book also includes twenty pages of patterns and specifications along with advice on selecting the right paddle for different types of paddling.

I bought this book right after using that rented paddle and returned for our annual canoe trip the next year with my own homemade paddle, which is now a veteran of four or five trips. I couldn't be happier with the way it performs. The paddle is a glue-up of ash, cherry and mahogany, but as the book shows, paddles can be made from commonly-available woods found just about anywhere in the world.

Canoe Paddles: A Complete Guide to Making Your Own
Graham Warren & David Gidmark
2001, 144 pages
$17

Available from Amazon

Related Entries:
River Ridge Canoe Building the Six-Hour Canoe Kayaks You Can Build

10 March 2009 1535h

&lt;p&gt;Creative Commons are looking for a few good souls to intern this summer. Here's the &lt;a href="http://creativecommons.org/about/opportunities/"&gt;link&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; </content>

10 March 2009 1404h

The tools we're building to find, aggregate and consume tailored, filtered and hyperlocalized information are still nascent. My motto: register for everything, see what sticks. In the last few months, I've been hooked to EveryBlock, which lets you dive deep via street address and zip code, or pull back for city-wide look. The amount of data that's fine-sliced by location, neighborhood and zip code is just amazing. Beyond mentions of specific hoods in the mainstream media or blogs (including Yelp restaurant reviews), what EveryBlock does really well is provide a user-friendly, easy-to-digest interface for exploring public records: every building permit, restaurant inspection, police call, zoning agenda item and more. You can hone searches from a one- to eight-block radius around a particular address. And you can set daily/weekly email alerts, as well (I prefer a weekly update, but search via the site now and again).

There are handful of news-y aggregators like Placeblogger (which I've not tried) and Outside.In (which I enjoy). Much like the previously-reviewed PopUrls, Outside.In gives you one place to go (or email/RSS) to monitor a variety of outlets -- in this case location-specific "news, views and conversations" slotted into categories like food, music, real estate. Good stuff, but a little different. With EveryBlock, you get the actual public records, which tend to provide the most interesting tidbits, for me at least. In addition to suspicious people alerts, car break-ins and violent crimes, I discovered a person on my block is intending to tear down a one-story, single-family home and build a four-story condo -- yuck! (Beware: you really can spend hours with all this data.)

The only catch: EveryBlock is only available in 11 cities (as I write), but more are certainly on the way. If you're using any similar sites/services you love -- especially those covering areas EveryBlock does not -- please tell us about them in the comments below.

EveryBlock

Related Entries:
Google Local Consensus Web Filters Stumble Upon

9 March 2009 1647h

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-conyers/a-reply-to-larry-lessig_b_172642.html"&gt;Mr. Conyers says&lt;/a&gt; I "cross the line." He says I label his motivations for introducing this bill as "corrupt," that I accuse him of "shilling," and that I "dismiss" his bill as nothing more than a "money for influence scheme." On the basis of this "one piece of legislation," he says I have waved away "forty years of fighting against special interests." He insists that he has "earned a bit more of the benefit of the doubt" and "that there is far more to the 'open access' story than [my] muckracking tale lets on." (Mike Eisen and my original posts are &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-lessig-and-michael-eisen/is-john-conyers-shilling_b_171189.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-lessig-and-michael-eisen/john-conyers-its-time-to_b_172536.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. My blog post is &lt;a href="http://www.lessig.org/blog/2009/03/john_conyers_and_open_access.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;First, as to substance: As others have shown without doubt, there is absolutely no "more to the 'open access' story" than my and Mike Eisen's criticism let on. (See the rebuttals especially &lt;a href="http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=234"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://www.earlham.edu/%7Epeters/fos/2009/03/rep-conyers-defends-his-bill.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.) This bill is nothing more than a "publishers' protection act." It is an awful step backwards for science -- as 33 Nobel Prize winners, the current and former head of the NIH, the American Library Association, and the Alliance for Taxpayer Access have all said. And Mr. Conyers knows this. Practically the identical bill was introduced in the last Congress. Mr. Conyers' committee held hearings on that bill. The "open access" community rallied to demonstrate that this publishers' bill was bad for science. Even some of the cosponsors of the bill admitted the bill was flawed. Yet after that full and fair hearing on this flawed bill, like Jason in Friday the 13th, the bill returned -- unchanged, as if nothing in the hundreds of &lt;b&gt;reasons&lt;/b&gt; for why this bill was flawed mattered to the sponsors.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Second, as to "corruption": There are corrupt Members in Congress -- fewer, I believe, than at any time in our history, but the Randy "Duke" Cunninghams or Ted "A Series of Tubes" Stevens mean there must be at least some. John Conyers is not one of that class -- and nothing in what I wrote said anything different. I neither accused him of "shilling" nor labeled his "motivations" as "corrupt." The word "shilling" appeared in a question, begged by the combination of a disproportionate contribution and sponsorship of a baseless law. The word "corrupt" described a system, not a Member. Conyers is not "corrupt." Neither are his motivations. He is instead an extraordinary representative, a hero to many of us, the last member of the Judiciary Committee to vote to impeach Nixon still sitting on that committee, and a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus. He is an extraordinarily good soul, like the vast majority who choose to serve in government today.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But these good souls work in a corrupted system. For &lt;b&gt;of course&lt;/b&gt; I believe that Congress is defined by a "money for influence scheme" -- as do thousands of others who have joined Change Congress's "donor strike," &lt;a href="http://change-congress.org/?partner=lessigblog_conyers_rebuttal"&gt;pledging not to give&lt;/a&gt; a penny more to candidates who don't support fundamentally reforming our corrupt campaign-finance system. (&lt;a href="http://change-congress.org/?partner=lessigblog_conyers_rebuttal"&gt;Join here.&lt;/a&gt;) And who could believe any differently? Not a "scheme" in the crude sense that people are bribed, or that there's a quid pro quo, this money for that legislation. But in the very real sense that money buys access, and that Members -- some of whom spend between 30% and 70% of their time raising money to get back to Congress -- develop a finely honed sixth sense, constantly aware of how what they do might affect their ability to raise money.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Who could possibly think that this system doesn't corrupt what government does? Who could possibly believe it benign? The answer of course is no one -- not the least a Member like Mr. Conyers who has spent forty years watching an honorable institution dissolve into a cabal of overpaid telemarketers. Just think about it: While America is facing crises more severe than any in the past generation, many (and maybe most?) Members of Congress are spending &lt;b&gt;most&lt;/b&gt; of their time raising money to get back to Congress. This is like firefighters who take a coffee break in the middle of rescuing a trapped child, or police officers who stop at Starbucks on the way to a robbery. What sane person can look at this system and not think something has gone fundamentally wrong?&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;It is time that Congress take responsibility for the cynicism this system has produced. It is not enough for good souls to insist on their goodness. A good soul must act to change a corrupted system.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Supporting citizens' funding of the nation's elections -- as Mr. Conyers has -- is an important first step. That one change, I believe, would do more than any other to restore trustworthiness in Congress.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But that's not all you could do, Mr. Conyers. You have it within your power to remove any doubt about the reasons you have for sponsoring the legislation you sponsor: Stop accepting contributions from the interests your committee regulates. This was the principle of at least some committee chairmen in the past. It is practically unheard of today. But you could set an important example for others, and for America, about how an uncorrupted system of government might work. And you could do so without any risk to your own position -- because the product of your forty years of extraordinary work for the citizens of Michigan means that they'll return you to office whether or not you spend one dime on a reelection. Indeed, if you did this, I'd promise to come to Michigan and hand out leaflets for your campaign.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Until you do this, Mr. Conyers, don't lecture me about "crossing a line." For I intend to cross this line as often as I can, the outrage and scorn of Members of Congress notwithstanding. This is no time to play nice. And yours is just the first in a series of many such stories to follow -- targeting Republicans as well as Democrats, people who we agree with on substance as well as those we don't, always focusing on bad bills that make sense only if you follow the money.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Whether you're a Republican or Democrat, you can help us. Join our &lt;a href="http://change-congress.org/?partner=lessigblog_conyers_rebuttal"&gt;strike4change&lt;/a&gt;, refusing to support any candidate who doesn't support citizens' funding of the nation's elections. Or &lt;a href="http://change-congress.org/join"&gt;volunteer&lt;/a&gt; to help us track down more examples like this one.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;We will take the heat from the elected elites. From you, we need just the support it will take to show enough that real change must happen -- now.&lt;/p&gt; </content>

9 March 2009 1402h

&lt;p&gt;Read it &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-conyers/a-reply-to-larry-lessig_b_172642.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. I've got a father-in-law's 70th birthday, and a reply brief to complete before a response. But stay tuned (and pitch in if you can). &lt;/p&gt; </content>

7 March 2009 0102h

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-lessig-and-michael-eisen/john-conyers-its-time-to_b_172536.html"&gt;&lt;center&gt;&lt;img src="http://img.skitch.com/20090306-c996yrh5r623ap9mcmsdampip.jpg" alt="Lawrence Lessig and Michael Eisen: John Conyers, It's Time to Speak Up"/&gt;&lt;/center&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;On the &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-lessig-and-michael-eisen/john-conyers-its-time-to_b_172536.html"&gt;Huffington Post&lt;/a&gt;, Mike Eisen and I have asked Mr. Conyers to respond to the calls that he withdraw the embarrassing, anti-open access HR 801 (aka, the &lt;a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-801"&gt;Fair Copyright in Research Works Act&lt;/a&gt;). We've gotten tons of responses from people who have followed our request to call Conyers and other co-sponsors to ask about this. I'm grateful for the help to stop this mistake of a bill. I'd be even more grateful if more were to &lt;a href="http://strike4change.com"&gt;join the strike&lt;/a&gt; to change the economy of influence in DC that produces this sort of silliness. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Again: &lt;a href="http://strike4change.com"&gt;strike4CHANGE.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt; </content>

6 March 2009 1802h

Yes, it is now time to get a Kindle. You all have likely seen the many reviews and hoopla around e-books. I myself had planned to sit on the sidelines and let some of this technology mature before purchasing an e-book reader. But when Neal Stephenson sent me an advance copy of the 960 page Anathem in PDF format, I realized that it was time for me to get one. I had played around with the previously-reviewed Sony version, but decided to purchase the Amazon Kindle (1st generation) which had recently come out. At the time, this was primarily because it had the widest available e-book selection, and it seemed like that would only get better due to Amazon's relationship with publishers (there are now over 240,000 books in Kindle format).

However, after owning a Kindle for several months, and having just upgraded to the Kindle 2, I have discovered the real reason why you want one. It is because you think of books that you want to read while you are reading other books. On the Kindle you have the unique ability to buy the book right then and there, while you are thinking about it, and it appears on the device moments later all via a free cellphone link they call Whispernet. This feature is one of the least discussed, and to me most useful parts of owning a Kindle, especially compared to the other readers out there. It is because of this feature that I am now reading more than ever.

The fact that the books are less expensive, instantaneous, and you can carry a whole library of them everywhere you go is just icing on the cake. The E-ink screen, built in dictionary, and search functionality are all as good as you want them to be. For those of you who like to travel light, e-books really excel; I even put mine in a ziplock and read it in the bathtub. So far I like all the improvements in the Kindle 2, my only wish is they could get an FAA exemption so I could read during take off and landing. Nevertheless, I made a new cover for Kindle 2 with my laser cutter out of a copy of Green Eggs and Ham (pics below). My Kindle is now FAA-approved :)

[Note: Amazon recently released a Kindle iPhone App. If anyone can report positively or negatively, please let us know in the comments below or via the submit page!]

Kindle - 2
$360

Kindle Store

Available from Amazon

Related Entries:
Five Good eBooks Sony Clie (as Reader) Digital Library Cards

6 March 2009 1300h

I have been buying Neodymium Iron Boron (NIB) super magnets for years. Back then, the previously-reviewed Wondermagnets was the only source for hobbyists and they had quite a selection. But times have changed. For the past five years, I have been ordering my magnets from "Mr. George the SuperMagnetMan," unequivocally the best source today. His prices are the best on the net. His selection is vast: no one else has the stock he has or the variations in size of commonly available shapes. This is no exaggeration or hype. He's got stuff you can't get anywhere else and is constantly adding new items, like axially- and diametrically-magnetized NIB wedding rings and radially-magnetized ring magnets. He has magnets so large they are dangerous (fortunately he has put videos on YouTube that show you how to safely handle these monsters -- with large leather welding gloves and a special wooden wedge and a 2x4!). He also sells magnetic hooks, pyramid shaped magnets, magnetic jewelry, teflon coated magnets, heart, star, and triangle magnets. You can even get powdered magnets that act like iron filings on steroids! You name it he's got it. Most magnets are N45-N50 grade, the highest strength you can buy.

Some of the products I have ordered are the magnet powders, radially-magnetized ring magnet, various size sphere magnets, conical magnets, large rectangular magnets, cubes, and many others. Shipping charges are reasonable. Service is great. One time I ordered a bunch of stuff and never completely checked what I got. I went to use one of the magnets months later and found out it was the wrong size. He sent me the right size in the mail a few days after I emailed him.

Mr. George seems like a pretty cool dude, too. An electrical engineer, Mr. George develops magnet products himself and caters to other engineers, inventors, and hobbyists. He can have custom magnets made to order. He has also put up a series of educational videos on YouTube and has done a lot of work with kids. He has a saying, something like, "Give a kid a magnet and you have a friend for life."

Separating magnets:

SuperMagnetMan

Related Entries:
NeoCube Lindsay Publications Transmaterial

5 March 2009 1644h

When I met up with my normal winter hiking crew this season, everybody but me had Microspikes. After I fell twice on the icey trail (and I'm an agile hiker!), I came out of it with three gouges on my left hand. So I went ahead and got a pair. The next weekend we did an 8.5 mile hike on trails that were 30 percent ice. I wore my Microspikes, as did all but one of the other ten hikers. We saw only one other person farther up the mountain -- a thin, gray-haired trailrunner with headphones on. As he zoomed past with a nod and a smile, I saw he was also wearing Microspikes. The first time I was able to run down a completely ice-covered hiking trail and feel secure, I said, "That alone was worth it right there!"

Prior to purchasing the Microspikes, I vetted them against other products in the same category, including the previously-reviewed Yaktrax or STABILicers. At $60 retail (I found mine for $44), Microspikes are expensive, but for anyone out on real trails, they're the best. Yaktrax are the low-end, low-durability cheap version. STABILicers's cleats are OK (and fine for walkways and everday use, as the previous reviewer says), but for more rugged terrain, the Microspikes are preferable. Easy to put on, they're much lighter than STABILicers (14.4 oz vs. 28.5 oz for a comparable size -- almost a full pound lighter!). They also grip ice much better. I'm not speaking from direct experience; just echoing the voice of experience I discovered from my research. BackpackGearTest's reports alone were particularly convincing. I've actually run and tried my best to slide with them on, but just cannot at all. Still, they are low profile enough that you can wear them on all trail conditions aside from persistent rock/pavement.

Of course, none of these products are intended to compete with crampons, which excel in exceptionally-high vertical grades and when ice is very hard. They do not have the flexibility in range of use that Microspikes do, however, and are much heavier. Microspikes are not ghetto crampons either; they're the best of a set of products that fill a different, more diverse niche.

While Microspikes are tough, they're not without their flaws: they can gather snow under some conditions, do not provide any additional edging and some people report rubber grommet failures/tears over time. In the case of the latter, Kahtoola will ship a replacement pair to you -- and if you've sent in the undamaged one with the damaged one, they will even send the good one back to you so you'll have a spare.

Honestly, I was hoping to find a better-competing product to the Microspikes. It's unusual to find such a monopoly in hiking/backpacking stuff. But I believe they have risen to prominence for a reason.

-- Adam Skinner

Kahtoola Microspikes
$60
Available from Amazon

Manufactured by Kahtoola

Related Entries:
Denali Classic Snowshoes Nokian Ice Bike Tires Hiking Poles

4 March 2009 1552h

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19556.html"&gt;&lt;center&gt;&lt;img src="http://img.skitch.com/20090304-jyhwjehggmtcfmat5ftmx3xpr2.jpg" alt="Hoyer to W.H.: Hands off our earmarks - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com"/&gt;&lt;/center&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Herein brews perhaps the first important battle of reform for this President. I have long thought the President should resign his membership in the Democratic Party -- not because he doesn't or shouldn't share the values of the Democratic Party, but because it is time we recognize we need a President above either partisanship (which got us the "Contract with America") or bipartisanship (which got us the Iraq War). But Hoyer's behavior here makes the point most starkly.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Earmarks are a cancer: Not because they consume a large part of the budget -- they don't; not because we shouldn't be spending money -- we should. But because they feed the system of corruption that is the way Washington works. They are the cornerstone of a system feeding the worst of the lobbying mafia (another plug here for &lt;a href="http://www.amazon.com/Damn-Much-Money-Corrosion-Government/dp/0307266540"&gt;So Damn Much Money&lt;/a&gt;), which itself is the cornerstone of K St. capitalism. It was a mistake for Obama not to join McCain in targeting them during the campaign. It is a fantastic thing that he is beginning to target them now. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Cancers can be benign or malignant. This cancer is malignant when it feeds K St. capitalism. It is benign when it is simply a locally informed direction to how the government's money (aka, the people's money) should be spent. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;And apropo of the benign form of this cancer: I've agreed to help &lt;a href="http://speier.house.gov/"&gt;Congresswoman Jackie Speier&lt;/a&gt; with an experiment for earmark reform. (Decidedly and clearly progressive) Congresswoman Speier voted against the appropriations bill &lt;a href="http://speier.house.gov/apps/list/press/ca12_speier/approp.shtml"&gt;because of the earmarks in the bill&lt;/a&gt;. But as reported &lt;a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/04/MN8P168F1I.DTL"&gt;in the SF Chronicle&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;blockquote&gt;Speier is now trying a novel experiment: She's put together a citizen's oversight panel to recommend projects for federal funding, chaired by Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig, a critic of earmarks, and including local elected, business and labor leaders. If the model works, she may offer legislation to expand it nationally.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The panel will meet in 3 or 4 public hearings over the next month of so to review earmark proposals. We will then report our recommendations back to her. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The citizen panel idea is completely Speier's. It is a brilliant idea with enormous potential. More on the potential soon. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

4 March 2009 1402h

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://fairshare.cc"&gt;&lt;center&gt;&lt;div class="thumbnail"&gt;&lt;a href="http://skitch.com/lessig/bg4hr/fairshare-watch-how-your-work-spreads-understand-how-it-is-used"&gt;&lt;img src="http://img.skitch.com/20090304-t58ux3j2wgkna6285i68bj1c59.preview.jpg" alt="FairShare -- Watch how your work spreads. Understand how it is used." /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/center&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Identify your &lt;a href="http://creativecommons.org"&gt;Creative Commons&lt;/a&gt; content to &lt;a href="http://fairshare.cc"&gt;FairShare&lt;/a&gt;, a project of &lt;a href="http://attributor.com"&gt;Attributor&lt;/a&gt;, and the service will track and report how content is being used on the web. The service is free and the technology (Attributor) is amazing. Watch (to understand or for those who want, to profit) free content spread. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

4 March 2009 1302h

&lt;center&gt;&lt;object width="500" height="405"&gt;&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DHma3ZQRVoA&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;color1=0x5d1719&amp;color2=0xcd311b&amp;border=1"&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DHma3ZQRVoA&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;color1=0x5d1719&amp;color2=0xcd311b&amp;border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"&gt;&lt;/embed&gt;&lt;/object&gt;&lt;/center&gt; </content>

3 March 2009 2102h

&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href="http://huffingtonpost.com"&gt;Huffington Post&lt;/a&gt; is running &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-lessig-and-michael-eisen/is-john-conyers-shilling_b_171189.html"&gt;a piece&lt;/a&gt; about &lt;a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.801:"&gt;H.R. 801&lt;/a&gt; (the "&lt;a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-801"&gt;Fair Copyright in Research Works Act&lt;/a&gt;"), the latest version of John Conyers' awful idea. The law would forbid entities like the NIH from requiring that recipients of government grants make the product of their research openly accessible. (The current practice requires articles be freely accessible after 12 months.) Instead, Conyers' proposal would require that after the American taxpayer has paid for the research, the American taxpayer must pay publishers to get access to the product of the research. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The first important word to emphasize in the last sentence is "publishers." For unlike the ordinary market for creative work, here, the author isn't paid for his work through the copyright system. It is the government (indirectly) paying for the research that the author (a scientist) creates. Scientists write articles as part of their job; other scientists peer-review those articles (usually for free); and journals then publish those articles without paying the author anything. Those journals, however, then charge libraries across the world an increasingly high rate to get access to the research in those journals. As the industry has become more concentrated, those rates have skyrocketed -- rising much faster than inflation.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The "open access movement" was born to create an alternative to this. Even if restrictive copyright was a necessary evil in the days of dead-tree-based publishing, it was still an evil. High costs restrict access. The business model of the scientist is to spread his or her knowledge as widely as possible. Open access journals, such as, for example, those created by the &lt;a href="http://plos.org"&gt;Public Library of Science&lt;/a&gt;, have adopted a different publishing model, to guarantee that all all research is freely accessible online (under the freest Creative Commons license) immediately, to anyone around the world. This guarantee of access, however, is not purchased by any compromise in academic standards. There is still a peer-review process. There is still even a paper-based publication.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Pushed by scientists everywhere, the NIH and other government agencies were increasingly exploring this obviously better model for spreading knowledge. Proprietary publishers, however, didn't like it. And so rather than competing in the traditional way, they've adopted the increasingly Washington way of competition -- they've gone to Congress to get a law to ban the business model they don't like. If H.R. 801 is passed, the government can't even experiment with supporting publishing models that assure that the people who have paid for the research can actually access it. Instead, if Conyers has his way, we'll pay for the research twice.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The insanity in this proposal is brilliantly described by Jamie Boyle in &lt;a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a110fa6-0219-11de-8199-000077b07658.html"&gt;this piece in the FT&lt;/a&gt;. But after you read his peace, you'll be even more puzzled by this. For what possible reason could Conyers have for supporting a bill that 33 Nobel Prize Winners, and the current and former heads of the NIH say will actually hurt scientific research in America? More pointedly, what possible reason would a man from a district that insists on the government "Buying American" have for supporting a bill that basically subsidizes foreign publishers (for the biggest players in this publishing market are non-American firms, making HR 801 a kind of "Foreign Publishers Protection Act")?&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Well no one can know what goes on the heart or mind of Congressman Conyers. But what we do know is what &lt;a href="http://www.maplight.org/HR801_2009_Analysis"&gt;MAPLight.org published yesterday&lt;/a&gt;: That the co-sponsors of this bill who sit on the Judiciary Committee received on average two-times the amount of money from publishing interests as those who haven't co-sponsored the bill. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Now maybe that's just a coincidence. Maybe Conyers and his friends had a reason of principle to support a bill said by experts to "harm science in America." But if he did, then he more than anyone else should want a system for funding elections that makes it impossible for people like me to suggest that maybe it wasn't reason that led him to his silly support for such a stupid bill. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Yet another reason to support &lt;a href="http://blip.tv/file/1638636"&gt;citizen funded elections&lt;/a&gt;. Yet another reason to &lt;a href="http://change-congress.org"&gt;join the strike&lt;/a&gt; ("&lt;a href="http://strike4change.com"&gt;strike4change.com&lt;/a&gt;") Change Congress has launched. Promise not to give money to any candidate who doesn't support irrevocably citizen funded election. (Come on. You don't want to give anyway.)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;At the very minimum, &lt;a href="mailto:john.conyers@mail.house.gov"&gt;ask Congressman Conyers&lt;/a&gt; to explain exactly why -- if it wasn't the money -- he's so keen to hurt science. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

3 March 2009 1702h

These laminated cards display "strongly-worded" warnings ("I have a life-threatening allergy to XXX") in a range of foreign languages and even pictures where possible. While I have not seen these cards in use (nor have I used them myself), they really make a ton of sense. I had a friend once who was allergic to soy. Even in the States getting people to believe and deal with the allergy was difficult. Made me appreciate the plight of people who suffer from food allergies.

SelectWisely also tailors basic cards in more than two dozen languages for more than three dozen food allergies, plus phrases for vegetarian, vegan, gluen-free, and lactose intolerance. A great and simple idea. Sure you could mimic this easily with a printer and laminator, but the prices are not outrageous.

SelectWisely Allergy & Emergency Translation Cards
$3 - 10
Available from SelectWisely

Related Entries:
DIY language learning Rick Steves Travel Skills Rosetta Stone Language Learning

3 March 2009 1620h

Sometimes you just need to carry a lot of heavy stuff. For me it's usually books, either to/from the library, booksale, or used bookstore. One of the best containers I've found for hauling hefty loads is the classic Dandux Coal Bag. Made by C.R. Daniels -- known for their industrial trucks and carts, conveyor belts, outdoor gear, and even straitjackets -- this canvas tote is rated to hold up to 95 pounds and was originally intended for carrying rock or machine parts. L. L. Bean Boat/Tote bags are equally as classic, and more widely available, but I've found they just don't hold up like the Dandux ones. Some totes have slightly-longer handles, which lets you carry them over the shoulder. For me, being able to really load up the Dandux is worth having to carry it with your hands.

-- James Hom

Dandux Coal Bag
$27
Available from C.R. Daniels

Related Entries:
Ikea Tote Bag BookCrossing Tire Tote

2 March 2009 1726h

&lt;center&gt;&lt;span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"&gt;&lt;img alt="adobe_read_allowed.jpg" src="http://www.lessig.org/blog/adobe_read_allowed.jpg" width="612" height="864" class="mt-image-none" style="" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/center&gt; &lt;p&gt;Amazon has &lt;a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/28/0127236"&gt;caved&lt;/a&gt; into demands from the Authors Guild that it disable the ability of the Kindle to read a book aloud. This is very bad news.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;We had this battle before. In 2001, Adobe released e-book technology that gave rights holders (including publishers of public domain books) the ability to control whether the Adobe e-book reader read the book aloud. The story got famous when it was shown that one of its public domain works -- Alice's Adventures in Wonderland -- was marked to forbid the book to be read aloud. (&lt;a href="http://www.lessig.org/content/standard/0,1902,22914,00.html"&gt;Here's a piece&lt;/a&gt; I wrote about this in 2001). &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Now the issue is back. The Authors Guild has objected because Amazon's Kindle 2 has a function built in that enables the book to be read aloud. So when, for example, you're commuting, you can plug your Kindle 2 into your MP3 jack and have the book read aloud. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Amazon rightly argued that this did not violate any of the exclusive rights granted by copyright law to the copyright owners. In that, Amazon is exactly right. But nonetheless, it will now enable publishers to decide whether the Kindle books they sell will permit the book to be read aloud. And of course, that includes public domain books. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;So here we go again -- How long till we can buy Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and be told that this book "cannot be read aloud"? &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But the bigger trend here is much more troubling: Innovative technology company (Amazon (Kindle 2), Google (Google Books)) releases new innovative way to access or use content; so-called "representatives" of rights owners, Corleone-like, baselessly insist on a cut; innovative technology company settles with baseless demanders, and we're all arguably worse off. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;We're worse off with the Kindle because if the right get set by the industry that publishers get to control a right which Congress hasn't given them -- the right to control whether I can read my book to my kid, or my Kindle can read a book to me -- users and innovators have less freedom. And we may be worse off with Google Books, because (in ways not clear when the settlement was first reported) the consequence of the class action mechanism may well disable users and innovators from doing what fair use plainly entitled Google to do. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

28 February 2009 1702h

&lt;center&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.yeswescan.org/" title="Yes We Scan!""&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.yeswescan.org/yes.headline.2.png" style="width: 450px; height: 55px;" alt="YES WE SCAN" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/center&gt; &lt;p&gt;Carl Malamud has launched -- and we all should support -- a campaign to become head of the GPO. I can't imagine a more exciting appointment. Sometimes an agency needs STASIS. Sometimes it needs CHANGE. Gov't tech is certainly in the second category, and no one I know of could more effectively deliver on the commitment to open government than he. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://yeswescan.org"&gt;Join the campaign&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; </content>

27 February 2009 2302h

As the name suggests, the tiered tiffin carrier is comprised of stackable tiers of storage which can be laid out for all to enjoy. When you are done, you just stack 'em back up, lock the clasps, grab the handle and go. They are made out of a high quality stainless steel which makes them very sturdy yet quite light, and so easy to clean.

I am using the 4-tier tiffin, which holds enough food for my two kids, yet is small and light enough to carry everywhere. I also have a few 2-tiers which my kids take to school. Recently, I began taking my tiffins to pick-up my take-out orders. This beats using disposable items provided by the restaurant . My favorite take-out places are quite happy to oblige and love the concept.

Not all tiffins are the same. In my quest to find a stainless steel lunchbox, I tried a no-name brand tiffin sold through Amazon. It is poorly-designed, made from a poor quality stainless steel and it's massive. This new one I have is a perfect size (6.75 x 4.25 inches) and you can see the quality in the steel and workmanship. It's also less than half the price of fancier tiffins like the pyramid, which I'll admit looks pretty neat.

Tiffin Carrier
$20 - 4-tier
$15 - 3-tier
$12 - 2-tier
Available from Om Goods

Related Entries:
Mr. Bento Lunch Jar Laptop Lunchbox Stainless Steel Can Colander

27 February 2009 1715h

&lt;center&gt;&lt;img src="http://img.skitch.com/20090225-qtgnapdbpfsbj7uj44b4x5h6r1.jpg" width="600" height="168" alt="Untitled"/&gt;&lt;/center&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Flake"&gt;Jeff Flake&lt;/a&gt; (AZ-6, Republican) has introduced a resolution to call for an investigation about the relationship between earmarks and campaign funding. Having just finished Kaiser's amazing book, &lt;a href="http://www.amazon.com/Damn-Much-Money-Corrosion-Government/dp/0307266540"&gt;So Damn Much Money&lt;/a&gt;, I am confirmed in a suspicion I had before the election: that Flake/McCain were right to be so exercised about earmarks, and Obama/Dems were wrong. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;The point is not the total amount of earmarks. Indeed, for a liberal like me, I'm keen to see the government spend money (wisely, at least). The point instead is the corruption that the earmarking system engenders. The history of earmarks is the history of a business model, with lobbyists at the core, a Congress dependent upon campaign funding at the edge, and a world of staffers, bureaucrats and former Members keen not to upset their future employers (the lobbyists).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;But of course, one simple solution to this "problem" with earmarks would be to remove the corrupting connection -- to campaign finance. And the simplest way to do that would be to follow Teddy Roosevelt's other fantastic idea from 100 years ago -- Citizen Funded Elections. &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Thus, yet another reason to &lt;a href="http://strike4change.org"&gt;join the strike&lt;/a&gt; -- don't give money to politicians who don't irrevocably commit to citizen funded elections. &lt;/p&gt; </content>

25 February 2009 1802h

As you can see, your favorite website now displays more information, reflecting the activity that's been going on behind the scenes all along. Thanks to popular demand, the latest blog posts from planet.gentoo.org, packages from packages.gentoo.org and security announcements are summed up on Gentoo's home page.

Discuss this!

by Xavier Neys at 31 January 2009 0902h

We are excited to tell you that today we launch our new Friends of GNOME program. Now supporters can sign up to help the GNOME Foundation with recurring $10/month donations.

15 January 2009 1716h

What: Gentoo contributors get together to help each other fix bugs

Where: irc.freenode.net, #gentoo-bugs

When: Saturday, January 3, in a timezone near you

What do you need to bring?

• A Gentoo system, an Internet connection and an IRC client
• Your bug. If you don't have one, we will find you one to suit your area of interest and your skills
• Your favorite editor
• A way to test that your bug is fixed (asking people counts!)
• You don't need to know C, C++, or bash

What's a bug? Gentoo's way of tracking change requests. A change request can be anything from "I've found a typo in foo" to "I've built this really useful program called bar but there's no ebuild for it." Bugs have various levels of helpfulness, from identifying the existence of a problem to localizing the problem to providing the patch to fix it.

There are bugs in documentation such as man pages as well as ebuilds and the source code that Gentoo distributes. These bugs are problem reports. Bugs for things Gentoo doesn't do yet but you think should be done are feature requests. Bugday is more about fixing problems than adding features, but you won't be turned away if you want help with a new feature.

Want to know more about Bugday? It's held on the first Saturday of every month. It's an opportunity for everyone to contribute to making Gentoo better, and eventually you might even become a Gentoo developer. See the Bugday project page for more details.

Bugday is about community spirit. Gentoo is a community—there is no "me" and "them", there is only "we," so instead of lobbying for "them" to fix your particular bug, work together to fix it! Bugday is an opportunity to get help to help yourself.

If you've been wanting to get involved but weren't sure how, Bugday is a great way for you to see what goes on in making a distribution and get involved in Gentoo.

Discuss this!

Roy Bamford contributed the draft for this announcement.

by Tobias Scherbaum at 1 January 2009 0002h