Our Recommendation

Showing posts with label daringfireballnet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label daringfireballnet. Show all posts

Monday, December 20, 2010

Joel Henderson reviews the link between the S (daringfireball.net)

S of Nexus is the new Google Android phone. It is sold exclusively by Best Buy to United States for T-mobile network.

This is my personal review of S Nexus with the advantages and disadvantages. I will update this page to learn more.

Pure Android gingerbread this is the first phone generalized running the new operating system "gingerbread", version 2.3. I prefer Android apps stocks more modules manufacturer Motorola MotoBlur as the HTC sense UI. Improving more noticible: stock keyboard is much better than 2.2 and I prefer that it Swype.

Material new front camera (but step integrated chat yet). Of smart field (but no use widespread real yet) 16 gig memory built in, but no way to upgrade or to add an SD card)

Ugly ways all phone finds "cheap" for me. Something on the mixture of plastic materials and textures look well-built and not feels solidly. The bottom of the back has a strange hump doesn't fit my hand well, fit into one generic and advice over the phone slightly back when its on a desktop. The software has a theme omnipresent lime green and fluorescent orange color. Some people may like this. Personally, I think it is ugly and removes the out-of-the-box experience. Need to understand how to change the theme color. The buttons for the home, menu, search and return are rearranged all other Android phone that I had, which makes the interface more difficult for me to use and more likely to pressing me the wrong button. For example, the home button is at the bottom below right. In addition, I am a left hander and the home button is difficult to reach easily. Curved screen appears to cause distortion, such as whether a variable thickness rather than truly an AMOLED curve glass lens; the upper area of the phone has an effect of fish jar. [Added: this destruction shows curved glass vs flat AMOLED through user GD]

Buggy in several ways, the right of the box the phone had problems finding the T-mobile network and GPS. My dynamic Samsung Galaxy S had the same problems and S Nexus has much in common with the Galaxy. The home button and the button search appear to be broken: when I go into an application as a web browser, and then press home or search page, the phone vibrates but nothing else happens. Telephone application displays an error message like "cannot complete the call. The error dialog box is impossible to dismiss, and there is no way to compose another call. The fix is to re-establish the link between the overall. Three bugs above were impossible to report so far or binds that technical support is non-existent until now. T Mobile supports this phone because it is a Best Buy exclusive, but Best Buy just said "you have to ask Google", and the line help Samsung said "sorry our contact centre is closed."

User interface slow slow in several ways: graphs are nervous and choppy, as if the graphics chip cannot follow with scrolling. In my eyes, the Jig is on a par with the Galaxy; S It is noticibly slower than an iPhone 4. The question seems to be that S Nexus is not using a dedicated graphics chip and instead try and all graphics on the main processor Edition: others are this statement too. Slow data source: data speed is terribly slow compared to other phones T-Mobile news as MyTouch 4 G. This is because S Nexus uses the older, slower network (3 G - speed HPSAS) while G MyTouch 4 uses the most recent faster network (4 G - speed HPSA +). I see S Nexus as approximately five times more slowly, which is important for me because I use the phone for tethering. Slow repair: T-Mobile, explains my S Nexus service needs to fix the broken home button, which means mailing by phone to Google and waiting as Google mail back a replacement phone. This may take several days or more, which is much slower than a replacement for T-Mobile store even normal day. S Nexus considers flawed or rushed to launch. It is not an iPhone killer, and in my opinion it is not a necessary phone unless you have absolutely pure Android gingerbread or chip Near Field. Blog comments powered by

Sunday, December 19, 2010

24 Hours (daringfireball.net)

You may have heard that Delicious stops (or not?). A person on Twitter suggested that a group of engineers should gather on weekends and build a Delicious clone. In anticipation of this group of mystery people sitting and in doing so, I thought that I would like to make a quick todo list for them.

System account - you will need to adopt the standard model that are typical of a web application: accounts.Register hold and installing an SSL cert to appease the security database-oriented. Also: where you host it? What database? MySQL? Good. InnoDB? If you are deploying with another engineer, the typical conversation 30 minutes on the deployment of databases have all two hours.Decide on the ORM or simply write some lightweight classes that are tedious shit. We hope that you have selected a frame has some support for all otherwise… vérificationMéthodes to check email, length and force password user account template options, a good idea of the names of account that you want to hold back so that you can still do as /admin /static on.Lost password flow paths later. You want to generate a key and store the defeat for when someone asks to reset their password. This is another email which must go out.Sign flow.Sign flows. (Be sure and use POST method to sign.) See why here<- signs="" you="" out="" of="" delicious)sign="" up,="" display="" errors.update="" your="" settings,="" name,="" password,="" email—doh!="" you'll="" have="" to="" verify="" the="" email="" again.="" an="" account="" verification="" system="" done="" through="" email="" so="" you="" can="" verify="" people="" have="" given="" the="" correct="" information.scheduled="" backups="" of="" your="" database="" being="" pushed="" to="" a="" separate="" location.="" binlogs?="" mysqldump?="" you'll="" have="" to="" write="" a="" script="" or="" configure="" your="" off-site="" db="" slave.="" you="" might="" also="" want="" to="" test="" that="" it="" works.oh="" hey,="" you="" can="" delete="" your="" account="" on="" delicious?="" what="" does="" this="" mean="" for="" the="" bookmarks,="" favorites,="" and="" friend="" relationship="" interfaces="" you="" haven't="" even="" written="" yet?="" save="" that="" one="" for="" later="" i="" guess.following="" and="" being="" followed="" flow.="" this="" includes:="" a="" database="" for="" holding="" friend="" relationships.="" an="" interface="" for="" looking="" at="" everyone="" you="" follow.an="" interface="" for="" looking="" at="" everyone="" who="" follows="" you.ability="" on="" each="" of="" the="" above="" pages="" to="" follow="" (or="" unfollow),="" probably="" using="" ajax="" because="" people="" don't="" want="" to="" leave="" the="" page.="" also="" you're="" going="" to="" want="" to="" paginate="" that,="" some="" people="" are="" popular.blocking="" followers="" and="" the="" processes="" that="" recognize="" a="" follower="" has="" been="" blocked="" when="" displaying="" content.the="" required="" database="" indexes="" for="" extracting="" and="" displaying="" follower="" counts.so="" before="" we="" get="" to="" bookmarks,="" what="" about="" import="" tools?="" why="" would="" anyone="" move="" to="" your="" system="" without="" import="" tools?="" you="" will="" need:="" a="" task="" queue.="" hopefully="" distributed="" so="" you="" can="" pass="" importing="" off="" to="" your="" workers="" on="" other="" boxes="" when="" things="" get="" overloaded.some="" sense="" of="" the="" different="" formats="" you'll="" need="" to="" process.="" delicious="" being="" the="" big="" one,="" but="" there's="" google's="" product,="" diigo,="" xmarks="" and="" pinboard.="" also="" people="" are="" going="" to="" want="" to="" import="" from="" their="" browsers.="" i'm="" not="" even="" talking="" about="" actually="" processing="" these="" things,="" just="" understanding="" and="" researching="" the="" formats="" and="" pitfalls="" is="" going="" to="" take="" some="" time.actually="" doing="" the="" processing.="" what="" happens="" when="" something="" fails?="" do="" you="" offer="" a="" report?="" there's="" a="" new="" page.="" can="" they="" retry="" without="" duplicating="" inserts?="" i'm="" really="" only="" scratching="" the="" surface="" here,="" this="" is="" tedious="" shit.tags.="" related="" tags.="" searching="" tags.="" recent="" tags.="" explore="" tags.="" you="" gotta="" use="" that="" task="" queue="" for="" offloading="" a="" lot="" of="" this.="" when="" does="" it="" run?="" what="" happens="" when="" it="" fails?="" seriously,="" i="" don't="" even="" want="" to="" think="" about="" tags="" right="" now.="" there="" has="" to="" be="" a="" module="" out="" there="" that="" will="" do="" it.="" go="" read="" the="" docs="" to="" that.three="" letters:="" a="" p="" &="" i.you="" are="" going="" to="" write="" unit="" tests="" for="" all="" this,="">

You still do not fully inspected all your problems XSS, implemented research content, thinking about the design and UI, documentation and errors, different methods for storing links as bookmarklets (tested in all browsers) or, you know, actually record in a database for the presentation to you and other bookmarks.

Then there is a pattern in the URL which can be problematic (http://xyz.com/ versus http://www.xyz.com versus https://xyz.com/ versus http://xyz.com/index.html), I never really thought about this problem, I am certain that it will take only a few minutes. We deal with later.

(Thanks to usernameguy and Anil for some inspiration.)


Thursday, December 16, 2010

Chrome OS and platform longevity (daringfireball.net)

It is interesting to Google chrome OS targeting. Instead of trying to attract consumers who have demonstrated that they are not interested in "Net PC" - as the browser - only material, Google positioned chromium OS hardware as alternatives good markets, low-IT overloads allowing enterprises to deploy to the desktop.

Talk show last week, John Gruber and Dan Benjamin discusses why he can finally be a good time to do this: many computers today in business existence solely to run a web browser. John is almost all computers in a branch of the typical Bank, on which agents usually just type your information into a series of forms of web browser to do their job. Assuming that Internet Explorer dependencies can be removed without too much difficulty, are ideal candidates to be replaced with chrome OS.

But there is a major problem with this idea: technological conservatism on this scale.

Most companies who could use such a facility are large, and deployment of a major technological change their staff is a huge and very expensive. Even though Google somehow gave thousands of chromium OS netbooks without charge, any attempt will must spend a ton of money in labor, training employees and an increase in help desk needs computer Organization deployed the new Setup program.

That is why on your desktop PC banker is probably running Windows 2000, a platform for 11 years: because it is extremely expensive to update, and the current system works acceptable without all spending massive, unique on this year's budget.

For the replacement of business software platforms, longevity is an important requirement. For OS chrome to be considered by any business sufficiently important, their IT decision makers will want to know that chrome OS is going to be around and supported by Google years now.1 means support, at least, the hardware must be available, software licenses must continue and security issues must be corrected.

And any reasonably competent computer direction can clearly see that Google, for all of their computational power, is not known for the longevity of the product.

Of course, their web-based products have been around for some time and are not going anywhere. But they are launching products much more each year who forget rapidly and many unsuccessful products are quietly abandoned a few months or a few years later.

The Google simply not in the business to support long term for a range of products unsuccessful. It is part of what allows you to keep releasing new things all the time while the geeks say Microsoft a boring old dinosaur. But it departments must their platform providers behave much more like Microsoft.

I doubt many IT new executions will take the risk that the chrome OS will be stable enough platform to deploy long-term staffing their. As the saying goes, nobody ever fired…

The inhumane conditions of detention Bradley Manning (daringfireball.net)

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention Reuters/Jonathon Burch/AP/Salon

(updated below)

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime.  Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture.  Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning's detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any episodes of violence or disciplinary problems.  He nonetheless was declared from the start to be a "Maximum Custody Detainee," the highest and most repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement.  For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell.  Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions.  For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch).  For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs.  Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not "like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole," but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.

In sum, Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America's Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado:  all without so much as having been convicted of anything.  And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.

Just by itself, the type of prolonged solitary confinement to which Manning has been subjected for many months is widely viewed around the world as highly injurious, inhumane, punitive, and arguably even a form of torture.  In his widely praised March, 2009 New Yorker article -- entitled "Is Long-Term Solitary Confinement Torture?" -- the surgeon and journalist Atul Gawande assembled expert opinion and personal anecdotes to demonstrate that, as he put it, "all human beings experience isolation as torture."  By itself, prolonged solitary confinement routinely destroys a person’s mind and drives them into insanity.  A March, 2010 article in The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law explains that "solitary confinement is recognized as difficult to withstand; indeed, psychological stressors such as isolation can be as clinically distressing as physical torture."

For that reason, many Western nations -- and even some non-Western nations notorious for human rights abuses -- refuse to employ prolonged solitary confinement except in the most extreme cases of prisoner violence.  "It’s an awful thing, solitary," John McCain wrote of his experience in isolated confinement in Vietnam. “It crushes your spirit."  As Gawande documented: "A U.S. military study of almost a hundred and fifty naval aviators returned from imprisonment in Vietnam . . . reported that they found social isolation to be as torturous and agonizing as any physical abuse they suffered."  Gawande explained that America’s application of this form of torture to its own citizens is what spawned the torture regime which President Obama vowed to end:

This past year, both the Republican and the Democratic Presidential candidates came out firmly for banning torture and closing the facility in Guantánamo Bay, where hundreds of prisoners have been held in years-long isolation. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain, however, addressed the question of whether prolonged solitary confinement is torture. . . .

This is the dark side of American exceptionalism. . . . Our willingness to discard these standards for American prisoners made it easy to discard the Geneva Conventions prohibiting similar treatment of foreign prisoners of war, to the detriment of America’s moral stature in the world.  In much the same way that a previous generation of Americans countenanced legalized segregation, ours has countenanced legalized torture. And there is no clearer manifestation of this than our routine use of solitary confinement . . . .

It's one thing to impose such punitive, barbaric measures on convicts who have proven to be violent when around other prisoners; at the Supermax in Florence, inmates convicted of the most heinous crimes and who pose a threat to prison order and the safety of others are subjected to worse treatment than what Manning experiences.  But it's another thing entirely to impose such conditions on individuals, like Manning, who have been convicted of nothing and have never demonstrated an iota of physical threat or disorder.

In 2006, a bipartisan National Commission on America's Prisons was created and it called for the elimination of prolonged solitary confinement.  Its Report documented that conditions whereby "prisoners end up locked in their cells 23 hours a day, every day. . . is so severe that people end up completely isolated, living in what can only be described as torturous conditions."  The Report documented numerous psychiatric studies of individuals held in prolonged isolation which demonstrate "a constellation of symptoms that includes overwhelming anxiety, confusion and hallucination, and sudden violent and self-destructive outbursts."  The above-referenced article from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law states:  "Psychological effects can include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis."

When one exacerbates the harms of prolonged isolation with the other deprivations to which Manning is being subjected, long-term psychiatric and even physical impairment is likely.  Gawande documents that "EEG studies going back to the nineteen-sixties have shown diffuse slowing of brain waves in prisoners after a week or more of solitary confinement."  Medical tests conducted in 1992 on Yugoslavian prisoners subjected to an average of six months of isolation -- roughly the amount to which Manning has now been subjected -- "revealed brain abnormalities months afterward; the most severe were found in prisoners who had endured either head trauma sufficient to render them unconscious or, yes, solitary confinement.  Without sustained social interaction, the human brain may become as impaired as one that has incurred a traumatic injury."  Gawande's article is filled with horrifying stories of individuals subjected to isolation similar to or even less enduring than Manning's who have succumbed to extreme long-term psychological breakdown.

Manning is barred from communicating with any reporters, even indirectly, so nothing he has said can be quoted here.  But David House, a 23-year-old MIT researcher who befriended Manning after his detention (and then had his laptops, camera and cellphone seized by Homeland Security when entering the U.S.) is one of the few people to have visited Manning several times at Quantico.  He describes palpable changes in Manning's physical appearance and behavior just over the course of the several months that he's been visiting him.  Like most individuals held in severe isolation, Manning sleeps much of the day, is particularly frustrated by the petty, vindictive denial of a pillow or sheets, and suffers from less and less outdoor time as part of his one-hour daily removal from his cage.

This is why the conditions under which Manning is being detained were once recognized in the U.S. -- and are still recognized in many Western nations -- as not only cruel and inhumane, but torture.  More than a century ago, U.S. courts understood that solitary confinement was a barbaric punishment that severely harmed the mental and physical health of those subjected to it.  The Supreme Court's 1890 decision in In re Medley noted that as a result of solitary confinement as practiced in the early days of the United States, many "prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition . . . and others became violently insane; others still, committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better . . . [often] did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community."  And in its 1940 decision in Chambers v. Florida, the Court characterized prolonged solitary confinement as "torture" and compared it to "[t]he rack, the thumbscrew, [and] the wheel."

The inhumane treatment of Manning may have international implications as well.  There are multiple proceedings now pending in the European Union Human Rights Court, brought by "War on Terror" detainees contesting their extradition to the U.S. on the ground that the conditions under which they likely will be held -- particularly prolonged solitary confinement -- violate the European Convention on Human Rights, which (along with the Convention Against Torture) bars EU states from extraditing anyone to any nation where there is a real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment.  The European Court of Human Rights has in the past found detention conditions violative of those rights (in Bulgaria) where "the [detainee] spent 23 hours a day alone in his cell; had limited interaction with other prisoners; and was only allowed two visits per month."  From the Journal article referenced above:

International treaty bodies and human rights experts, including the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, have concluded that solitary confinement may amount to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment.  They have specifically criticized supermax confinement in the United States because of the mental suffering it inflicts.

Subjecting a detainee like Manning to this level of prolonged cruel and inhumane detention can thus jeopardize the ability of the U.S. to secure extradition for other prisoners, as these conditions are viewed in much of the civilized world as barbaric.  Moreover, because Manning holds dual American and U.K. citizenship (his mother is British), it is possible for British agencies and human rights organizations to assert his consular rights against these oppressive conditions.  At least some preliminary efforts are underway in Britain to explore that mechanism as a means of securing more humane treatment for Manning.  Whatever else is true, all of this illustrates what a profound departure from international norms is the treatment to which the U.S. Government is subjecting him.

* * * * *

The plight of Manning has largely been overshadowed by the intense media fixation on WikiLeaks, so it's worth underscoring what it is that he's accused of doing and what he said in his own reputed words about these acts.  If one believes the authenticity of the highly edited chat logs of Manning's online conversations with Adrian Lamo that have been released by Wired (that magazine inexcusably continues to conceal large portions of those logs), Manning clearly believed that he was a whistle-blower acting with the noblest of motives, and probably was exactly that.  If, for instance, he really is the leaker of the Apache helicopter attack video -- a video which sparked very rare and much-needed realization about the visceral truth of what American wars actually entail -- as well as the war and diplomatic cables revealing substantial government deceit, brutality, illegality and corruption, then he's quite similar to Daniel Ellsberg.  Indeed, Ellsberg himself said the very same thing about Manning in June on Democracy Now in explaining why he considers the Army Private to be a "hero":

The fact is that what Lamo reports Manning is saying has a very familiar and persuasive ring to me.  He reports Manning as having said that what he had read and what he was passing on were horrible -- evidence of horrible machinations by the US backdoor dealings throughout the Middle East and, in many cases, as he put it, almost crimes. And let me guess that -- he’s not a lawyer, but I'll guess that what looked to him like crimes are crimes, that he was putting out. We know that he put out, or at least it's very plausible that he put out, the videos that he claimed to Lamo.  And that's enough to go on to get them interested in pursuing both him and the other.

And so, what it comes down, to me, is -- and I say throwing caution to the winds here -- is that what I've heard so far of Assange and Manning -- and I haven't met either of them -- is that they are two new heroes of mine.

To see why that's so, just recall some of what Manning purportedly said about why he chose to leak, at least as reflected in the edited chat logs published by Wired:

Lamo: what's your endgame plan, then?. . .

Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not, than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the video… David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

if i knew then, what i knew now - kind of thing, or maybe im just young, naive, and stupid . . . im hoping for the former - it cant be the latter - because if it is… were fucking screwed (as a society) - and i dont want to believe that we’re screwed.

Manning described the incident which first made him seriously question the U.S. Government: when he was instructed to work on the case of Iraqi "insurgents" who had been detained for distributing so-called "insurgent" literature which, when Manning had it translated, turned out to be nothing more than "a scholarly critique against PM Maliki":

i had an interpreter read it for me… and when i found out that it was a benign political critique titled "Where did the money go?" and following the corruption trail within the PM’s cabinet… i immediately took that information and *ran* to the officer to explain what was going on… he didn’t want to hear any of it… he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding *MORE* detainees…

i had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the truth… but that was a point where i was a *part* of something… i was actively involved in something that i was completely against…

And Manning explained why he never considered the thought of selling this classified information to a foreign nation for substantial profit or even just secretly transmitting it to foreign powers, as he easily could have done:

Manning: i mean what if i were someone more malicious- i could've sold to russia or china, and made bank?

Lamo: why didn’t you?

Manning: because it's public data

Lamo: i mean, the cables

Manning: it belongs in the public domain -information should be free - it belongs in the public domain - because another state would just take advantage of the information… try and get some edge - if its out in the open… it should be a public good.

That's a whistleblower in the purest and most noble form:  discovering government secrets of criminal and corrupt acts and then publicizing them to the world not for profit, not to give other nations an edge, but to trigger "worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms."  Given how much Manning has been demonized -- at the same time that he's been rendered silent by the ban on his communication with any media -- it's worthwhile to keep all of that in mind.

But ultimately, what one thinks of Manning's alleged acts is irrelevant to the issue here.  The U.S. ought at least to abide by minimal standards of humane treatment in how it detains him.  That's true for every prisoner, at all times.  But departures from such standards are particularly egregious where, as here, the detainee has merely been accused, but never convicted, of wrongdoing.  These inhumane conditions make a mockery of Barack Obama's repeated pledge to end detainee abuse and torture, as prolonged isolation -- exacerbated by these other deprivations -- is at least as damaging, as violative of international legal standards, and almost as reviled around the world, as the waterboard, hypothermia and other Bush-era tactics that caused so much controversy.

What all of this achieves is clear.  Having it known that the U.S. could and would disappear people at will to "black sites," assassinate them with unseen drones, imprison them for years without a shred of due process even while knowing they were innocent, torture them mercilessly, and in general acts as a lawless and rogue imperial power created a climate of severe intimidation and fear.  Who would want to challenge the U.S. Government in any way -- even in legitimate ways -- knowing that it could and would engage in such lawless, violent conduct without any restraints or repercussions?  

That is plainly what is going on here.  Anyone remotely affiliated with WikiLeaks, including American citizens (and plenty of other government critics), has their property seized and communications stored at the border without so much as a warrant.  Julian Assange -- despite never having been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime -- has now spent more than a week in solitary confinement with severe restrictions under what his lawyer calls "Dickensian conditions."  But Bradley Manning has suffered much worse, and not for a week, but for seven months, with no end in sight.  If you became aware of secret information revealing serious wrongdoing, deceit and/or criminality on the part of the U.S. Government, would you -- knowing that you could and likely would be imprisoned under these kinds of repressive, torturous conditions for months on end without so much as a trial:  just locked away by yourself 23 hours a day without recourse -- be willing to expose it?  That's the climate of fear and intimidation which these inhumane detention conditions are intended to create.

* * * * *

Those wishing to contribute to Bradley Manning's defense fund can do so here.  All of those means are reputable, but everyone should carefully read the various options presented in order to decide which one seems best.

UPDATE:  I was contacted by Lt. Villiard, who claims there is one factual inaccuracy in what I wrote:  specifically, he claims that Manning is not restricted from accessing news or current events during the proscribed time he is permitted to watch television.  That is squarely inconsistent with reports from those with first-hand knowledge of Manning's detention, but it's a fairly minor dispute in the scheme of things.

Making Bayesian on Julian Assange (daringfireball.net)

Erreur lors de la désérialisation du corps du message de réponse pour l’opération « Translate ». Dépassement du quota maximal pour la longueur du contenu de chaîne (8192) lors de la lecture de données XML. Ce quota peut être augmenté en modifiant la propriété MaxStringContentLength sur l’objet XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas utilisé pendant la création du lecteur XML. Ligne 1, position 8685.
Erreur lors de la désérialisation du corps du message de réponse pour l’opération « Translate ». Dépassement du quota maximal pour la longueur du contenu de chaîne (8192) lors de la lecture de données XML. Ce quota peut être augmenté en modifiant la propriété MaxStringContentLength sur l’objet XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas utilisé pendant la création du lecteur XML. Ligne 1, position 9006.

Suppose that you are taking the bullet train from Kyoto, Japan to Tokyo, as I did yesterday. The woman seated across from you has somewhat unusual facial features. You are curious to know whether she is Japanese, Caucasian, or some mix of both.

Suppose furthermore that I asked you to estimate, in percentage terms, the likelihood of each of these three possibilities (ignoring others like that she might be Korean, Latina, etc.) Certainly, there are lots of other clues that we might look for to improve our estimate: How is she dressed? How tall is she? What type of mobile phone is she carrying? What is her posture like? (The more forthright among us, of course, might also seek to start a conversation with her, in which case the answer might become clear more quickly.) That notwithstanding, in the absence of further information, most of us would tend to equivocate: perhaps there is a 25 percent chance that she is Japanese, we might say, a 25 percent chance that she is Caucasian, and a 50 percent chance that she is of mixed ethnicity.

But that would be a fairly bad answer. Even in the absence of additional information about the woman, we have another very important clue that can become surprisingly easy to forget if we become too fixated on the details: we are in Japan!  There are a lot more Japanese people in Japan than there are Caucasians (indeed, the country remains among the more ethnically homogeneous industrialized societies.) It probably follows also that there are a lot more white-looking Japanese people in Japan than there are Japanese-looking white people. It’s therefore quite a bit more likely that we’ve encountered one of the former than one of the latter on our train ride. A better ‘prediction’ about her ethnicity, then – conditioned on the fact that we are in Japan — might be something like this: there is a 60 percent chance she is Japanese, a 35 percent chance she is mixed, and only a 5 percent chance she is Caucasian. If we were on a train from Boston to New York, instead of from Kyoto to Tokyo, the probabilities would gravitate toward the other end of the spectrum.

Psychologists and behavioral economists have conducted a lot of experiments along these lines, testing our ability to think through problems that involve what statisticians call Bayesian inference: those that require to us to infer the likelihood of various possibilities based on a combination of prior, underlying conditions (we are in Japan: most people we encounter here will be of Japanese ancestry) and new information (but based on this woman’s appearance, it is hard to tell whether she is Caucasian or Japanese!) They’ve found that, in general, we do pretty badly with them: we tend to get lost in the most immediate details and we forget the underlying context.

I was reminded about this recently when reading WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is wanted for questioning by Swedish authorities on charges that that he has committed sexual assault. People have spent a lot of time debating the details of the charges, which invoke a number of difficult questions about what constitutes consent during a sexual encounter. Commenters differ in their interpretations both about the facts intrinsic to the case and in their readings of Swedish law.
I certainly do not intend to resolve those debates, although they are by no means uninteresting or unimportant. What I would suggest, however, is that it would be a mistake, from the standpoint of Bayesian reasoning, to think we can separate out the merits of the charges from their political motivations.
There is virtually no chance that the case against Mr. Assange would have proceeded in quite the same manner if he were instead an itinerant painter named Jens Andersen, or a traveling salesman named John Andrews — instead of an internationally renowned provocateur. Indeed, the charges might not have been brought against Mr. Assange in the first place. Sweden has among the highest rates of reported rape cases in the European Union. But unfortunately, few cases are brought to trial (only between 10 and 20 percent, according to various reports), and fewer still result in convictions.
That alone might not tell us much. There are other ways, however, in which the behavior of the authorities has been quite unusual.
The initial warrant in the case against Mr. Assange had been issued in August. But it was  revoked the next day, due to what the lead prosecutor cited as a lack of evidence. It was only last month – just as WikiLeaks was preparing to release a set of confidential diplomatic cables – that Sweden again issued a warrant to detain him.
After turning himself in to the authorities in London, Mr. Assange was initially denied bail (although he has since been awarded it) — which is particularly unusual given that Swedish authorities have still not formally charged him with a crime, but merely want to bring him in for questioning. Most unusually still, Sweden had issued an Interpol red alert for Mr. Assange’s arrest, something they have done for only one other person this year accused of a sex crime: Jan Christer Wallenkurtz, who is suspected of multiple cases of sexual assault against children. 
The handling of the case has been highly irregular from the start, in ways that would seem to make clear that the motivation for bringing the charges is political.
Does that mean, however, that the underlying charges themselves are spurious, trumped up, outright false, or otherwise dubious? (Some have speculated, for instance, that Mr. Assange may have been entrapped.) No, not for certain, of course — but it does have an impact on the probabilities.
From our standpoint, there is a lot of uncertainty about what happened between Mr. Assange and the two women in Sweden. This is common in sexual assault cases, which can be very difficult to prove, in part because victims are often too scared or too traumatized to provide as many details about the case as authorities might want. Also, of course, prosecutors will want to make the case seem as strong as possible, while the defense will want to make it seem as weak as possible, so they will be selective about which facts they release to the public.
A case that might intrinsically be very strong (if we were omniscient and knew exactly what happened) might seem relatively weak to us; likewise, a case that were relatively weak could be made to seem strong. It is as though we are again on that bullet train in Japan, trying to discern the identity of the passenger seated next to us, but having only a limited and ambiguous set of clues with which to do so.
What is less ambiguous here, however — as in the case of my bullet train analogy — is the underlying context. The handling of the charges suggests that the motivation for bringing them against Mr. Assange is political. If the motivation is political, then the merits of the charges might matter less. Even if they fail to result in a conviction, the authorities might nevertheless succeed in, in essence, incapacitating Mr. Assange for several months, and preventing him from releasing further documents through WikiLeaks. They might also injure Mr. Assange’s reputation among the public: certainly I have learned more about details Mr. Assange’s personal life in recent days than I would care to know.
Under these circumstances, then, it becomes more likely that the charges are indeed weak (or false) ones made to seem as though they are strong. Conversely, if there were no political motivation, then the merits of the charges would be more closely related to authorities’ zealousness in pursing them, and we could take them more at face value.
I suspect this point will seem obvious to many of you: the fact that the charges are (apparently) politically motivated is indeed a reason to regard them skeptically, and they make it less likely — perhaps much less likely — that Mr. Assange is guilty of them. (Although he may be guilty of being a creep even if he is not guilty of a crime.)
Nevertheless, I have come across a number of analyses that try to evaluate the merits of the charges without regard to this political context, or which otherwise seem caught up in debating their salacious details. That is likely a mistake: in a world of limited information, the political motivation behind the charges might be the most important clue we have in evaluating their merit.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

What is wrong with OpenID? (Daringfireball.net)

This is an solution to a problem of tech-self-imposed technology-approached: the identification of the user.

Because the identification is not something that I normally. When I walk around, when I enter a store when I buy something, when i... live person not explicitly stop me for a few minutes asking my identity... with the exception of - wonder! -our self-imposed "solutions".

Exactly like connections.

Think OpenID in the early years was "borrowing ideas" how passports are processed. Who thinks that the current passport system is a fantastic way to manage identities please raise a helping hand. ;)

Back to us.

While I agree on everything else in his comment to me, this statement is in bold, interesting... but bad:

a problem that most people do not really have. -Yishan Wong

Problem * is *. And it is huge. It is huge for all problems, it raises, all the things that it blocks and all the implementation obstacles he hides.

Think about it: you cannot build a service that has need identity if the usefulness of the service is smaller than the cost (mind and time), the login process. We find that an overview of connection click created by Facebook and the like.

The solution?

We need to step back and understand why we are trying to do and it is on the identification, not anything else. And identification between me and someone else, not by a party of mediation (which is necessary to ensure the safety and security, not for the process of identifying itself)!

I've been thought much about it and it is one of the reasons why I would like to join the Mozilla team: the system login must be an API provided by the browser itself, with the possibility to choose personal or work (due to different uses of the same services) and even anonymous profiles if you want to navigate safely. Because the browser is my "API" to interact with the web. 1Password and similar tools are trying to take a status quo approach to this problem, but they aren't the next step (probably just share sheer numbers expire).

Identification - logic logins, OpenID, certificates, etc. - should go to the website of the browser.

With this solution, you be able to just browse and use each service without - almost - even noticing that you have been authenticated. Of course, it must be designed and tested thoroughly, it is not as simple as to say, but that if non-Mozilla can push out a feature like this?

I think this is the game changing.
(see section above in italics for the reason why)

I think that a group with this vision and correct emphasis on technical issues, user experience, privacy and security will appear somewhere. Perhaps for chrome, perhaps in WebKit, dev team maybe in dev Firefox, perhaps within the Microsoft dev team team dev team maybe in Opera Web team. Who knows.

Friday, December 10, 2010

How much Verizon iPhone, Apple sell prior year? (Daringfireball.net)

Analysts are cooking the new carrier in their estimates of 2011, but underestimate sales


Wednesday, Doug Reid of Stifel Nicolaus raised his price target of Apple (AAPL) $390 per share, from $360) based in part on his "increased trust" a launch of Verizon (VZ) at the beginning of 2011 (mid-February is its best estimate).


Thursday, Merrill Lynch Scott Craig did likewise, raising its target to $420 (from $415) for similar reasons. "We anticipate a Verizon iPhone introduced at the beginning of the C2011", he wrote, "and we are now Verizon cooking in our estimates."


This is therefore how Verizon are cooked in? Surprisingly little.


"We anticipate a scenario of less than 10 million units to Verizon [Calendar] 2011," writes Craig, "even if we only added the 6 units and 8 million in 2011 and 2012, respectively."


Reid is even more cautious. It is only raise its 2011 iPhone sales estimates 63.3 million of 62.5 million or 800,000 units.


What is - this? This measly 800 000?


For reasons known only to themselves, analysts have been anticipating hard a Verizon iPhone are now occupied lowering expectations.


In June, James Ratcliffe Barclays Capital predicts that Verizon sell here 9 million next year. Last month, BMO Capital markets analysts talked about 8 million.


"In the past", writes Craig Merrill, "when the iPhone has been added to a second carrier in one country (France Norway Canada, UK, etc.), iPhone shipments increased almost 1: 1 with the Subscriber's database indicating little/no loss share the incumbent carrier." We are more conservative in our estimates, account held in the most recent competition increased Android devices and some cannibalization likely to AT & T. (T)


When though.


"I do not see why the number may not be the same as what is AT & T," says Horace the Asymco Dediu. "Why analysts low-ball is beyond me."

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Jim Dalrymple: Mac App Store launch in January (daringfireball.net)

On the contrary, despite the reports published by the Apple Mac App Store launch in January 2011.

Reports earlier this week, said Apple launch the Bank application Mac December 13 before the holiday season shopping. However, according to my sources, Apple will launch the store in the new year.

While a specific date was not received at the official opening of the Bank by my sources, Apple will meet the 90 days period given to its October "Mac" media event.


Taking into account the date of the media event and the commitment of the President and CEO of Apple Steve Jobs to start the store within 90 days, we should see the Mac application store sometime on or before the third week of January.


appstore release20101020 Mac App Store launching in January 2011The Bank application Mac will have many features iOS device users are accustomed to since the beginning of the Bank application, such as with a single click, the ability to acquire the paid apps, split of 70/30% income (for developers) or free software downloads, automatic installation, automatic updates and a licence which will cover all your personal Mac.

Filed under  APP store, App Store Mac Email This Post post this e-mail · Print This Post · post post comments powered by commentblog

Android (daringfireball.net) pre-Installed applications

How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android DeviceWhether you're resisting the temptation to upgrade to newer, faster hardware, or a year's worth of use has made your Android phone feel slow and laggy, here are some ways to make your older phone run a bit smoother.


This guide provides a number of tips you can use to speed up your phone, and while not every tip will apply to you or your phone, you should find at least a few tips in here that will. Whether you've rooted your phone, overclocked, flashed a new ROM, or none of the above, you'll be able to take advantage of a number of the tweaks below to get your phone from sluggish and glitchy to quick and smooth.


Everyone's phone is different, too, so note that some of the more advanced tweaks may take a bit of trial and error on your part. I've experienced good things with these tweaks on my Motorola Droid (which, yes, had gotten pretty darn sluggish and glitchy, even for a barely year-old phone), but I'll note where a different approach to a specific tweak will help owners of older or more underpowered phones. Users with newer phones (like the Droid Incredible or Galaxy S) may not need these tips as much, but I've heard from several sources that even speedy phones like those have benefited from these tips, so they're worth playing around with no matter what phone you have.


There are a lot of great tweaks out there for rooted phones, but there are a ton of really simple things you can do to speed up your phone, even if you haven't done any hacking whatsoever.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device
We've talked about the benefits of other home screen launchers on more than one occasion, but I can't stress how great of an upgrade this can be. As always, I'm a huge proponent of LauncherPro, as it will not only bring you a noticeable speed increase upon installing it, but it also has lots of advanced features we can tweak to boost our speed even further (more on that later). Of course, ADWLauncher is also very popular, and the Android Market is rife with other options.


I'm going to write the rest of this tutorial from the perspective of a LauncherPro user, since from what I've seen, it has the most speed-boosting options, but you should be able to find many of the settings I mention below in other launchers, too—I'll note where a few of them are along the way, but you may have to do some poking around of your own depending on what Launcher you're using.


If you have an HTC phone with the exclusive Sense UI and you'd rather not ditch it for something like LauncherPro, that's fine—you can still put this tip into practice. While some phones, like the Motorola Droid, come with a mere three five home screens, many (including most HTC phones) come with up to seven. While this is pretty handy if you like lots of icons and widgets (which I'll mention again in a moment), they can really take up a lot of memory on your phone, which can cause jerky animations, lag, and force closes.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device


In our guide to organizing your Android home screen, we mentioned the two philosophies behind home screen usage. It's fine to have lots of home screens, icons, and widgets, but if your phone isn't performing up to your standards, you may have to compromise and try using fewer home screens (or at least find a middle ground). I went down from seven to three home screens and haven't looked back—the jump in performance was pretty incredible.


If you're using LauncherPro, you can pick your number of home screens by hitting the Menu button on your phone, tapping Preferences, then tapping Homescreen Settings. If you're sticking with your stock launcher, you may not have the option to actually decrease the number of home screens, but you can still benefit by removing some icons and widgets from two to four of your home screens. It probably won't give you as big of a benefit as getting rid of the screens entirely, but those widgets can still suck up tons of memory, and deleting them from your home screen should make your phone run noticeably smoother.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device
When we discussed the myth of Android task killers, we mentioned that one of the real problems with slow phones is running poorly coded apps—apps that use up too much CPU in the background. Previously mentioned Watchdog is still a great way to keep track of those apps: if something is constantly running in the background, it may be causing some of the performance hits on your device. Unless it's something you can't live without (and are thus willing to live with any slowness it might cause), uninstall it and find an alternative.


Note that some of the worst offenders in this category are apps that come pre-installed on your phone. Unfortunately, you need to be rooted to uninstall these, but we'll talk about that in a bit.


It's also worth mentioning that even if an app doesn't misbehave (heck, even if you don't run it at all), it can cause slowdowns on your device. Believe it or not, the more free space you have in your phone's internal memory, the faster your phone can write to the disk. If you aren't sure how much free space your phone has, you can check it by going to Settings > SD Card & Phone Storage to see. You can also see which ones are taking up the most space by going to Settings > Applications > Manage Applications, hitting Menu, and sorting them by size. If you find you aren't even using an app that's hogging space, you might as well uninstall it—no point in keeping it around just so it can slow down your phone.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device


Your other option is to use the ever-handy Apps2Sd to move some of those apps off your phone's internal storage and onto your SD card. By default, the developer of a given app usually decides whether an app will install to your SD card, but with the App 2 SD app, you can do it yourself. Just pop open the app, and you'll get a list of apps that are on your internal storage that have the ability to move to the SD card. Just move them over to free up space.


If you really want to dig into your system's settings (or you compromised on that "use fewer home screens" tip), there are a few more advanced tweaks you can make to your launcher that should help it run a bit smoother.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device


If you're using LauncherPro, hit the Menu button and go to Preferences > Advanced Settings > Memory Usage Settings. While you can tweak the Advanced Settings to your liking, the easiest way to take advantage it to use one of LauncherPro's many Memory Usage Presets. These presets tweak different settings to fit the needs for different people and different phones. You can read more about these settings on the LauncherPro blog, but here's what you really need to know:



Starting with version 0.6.1, there is a new option in the preferences called "Memory usage". Right now there are three modes; light, medium, and high.

Light mode is basically what 0.6.0 uses, and it's made for users that have 5 or more screens, a lot of widgets/icons (or many full-screen widgets), 3D drawer, etc.Medium is the default, it should work best for most users with a moderate-to-high amount of widgets/icons.High mode doesn't try to optimize memory usage. It's very much like the early versions of LauncherPro, so it should give the best performance. If you don't have a lot of widgets/icons on your screens, you should try this setting.

Note that there are now more than three presets, but the general premise remains the same. If you're still filling up your home screen with icons and widgets, you might want to try out a setting on the low end of the list. If you've taken my advice thus far, I can tell you High mode will give you a pretty nice performance boost.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device


One great thing about LauncherPro is that if you go to Preferences > Advanced Settings and check Display Memory Usages, you'll be able to see how much RAM is being used at any given time. This is a good way to tell whether you have RAM to allocate to these different things, or whether the amount of RAM is too small to let LauncherPro keep trying to use it all up.


If you're using ADWLauncher, you won't have nearly as many choices, but I would still recommend going into ADW's settings, hitting System Preferences, and playing around with a few of the features there like Scrolling cache and System persistent, which should perform similar tasks (albeit not as well as LauncherPro or CyanogenMod's similar settings, which I'll talk about in the section for rooted phones).


If you've taken the plunge and rooted your Android device, you have a few more options available to you that should help you eke some extra speed out of your device. Note that these are a bit more advanced (as would be expected with root-only options), and require a bit more care, so be sure to backup your phone before you make any huge changes to it in case anything goes wrong.


Still one of the best reasons to root your phone is to install a custom ROM, not only for the neat features it brings but for the speed increases it can bring your phone. We've gone through the details of installing custom ROMs before, so I won't go too deeply into it here, but I do recommend it if you need some speed increases, especially if the ROM is based off a later version of Android than your phone currently has. Lots of phones are still stuck with 2.1 and earlier, and while some ROMs can run a bit slower than stock Android on some phones, the speed increases Android 2.2 brings likely outweigh them.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device


Many ROMs are built for speed and stability, and while you'll get a great performance boost from them, I've found that even with a ROM like CyanogenMod I've been able to eke some good performance out of my phone (especially by tweaking some of CyanogenMod's advanced features). So don't think that you have to choose a ROM like Bugless Beast just because you have an old phone. Of course, trying a few different ROMs is always a good idea to see what works best for you.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device
A surefire way to get a speed boost out of your old, underpowered phone is to overclock it. We've also discussed this already before, so we won't get too deep into it here, but I will remind you that to overclock, you'll need to install a custom kernel. These are specific to your device, so you'll have to do some googling for compatible overclocking kernels to find one that's right for you. Generally, kernels are organized by two things: voltage and clock speed. The higher clock speed you choose, the more likely you'll need a higher voltage kernel (which, by the way, will drain battery faster). As long as you're not going overboard with the overclocking, you should be able to get by with a low or standard voltage kernel without a problem.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device
If your phone came pre-installed with all sorts of applications that you don't need, you can unisntall them with an app called Titanium Backup. Once you've downloaded it, just open it up and hit the "Backup/Restore" button at the top of the screen. Tap the app you want to get rid of. You'll probably want to back it up first, in case it ends up being integral to your phone's operation, but once you have you can uninstall it from the same screen. Alternatively, you can just freeze the app, which won't free up space on your phone's memory, but will keep it from running in the background and slowing your phone down. Note also that, like all these root-only options, you could seriously mess up your phone if you go too crazy, so maybe a full-phone backup is also a good choice here.


This is one of the most difficult tweaks to perform on your phone, because it varies so much from person to person what works best. Furthermore, some ROMs may not have these settings in their preferences—you may have to do some terminal work to enable them. I'll go through what they are, and point out their location in the CyanogenMod ROM since it's the most popular and widely available, but if you don't have them in your ROMs settings you may have to do some googling to find out how to tweak them. That said, here are some of the handier features.


How to Speed Up Your Old or Sluggish Android Device


Compcache: Compcache is essentially virtual swap space in your RAM. In a nutshell, it gives you "more" RAM, but it's a bit slower than regular RAM because it takes CPU to compress and decompress packages that are swapped into it. This is one of the most debated features: many find that it helps things like the home screen load faster; others prefer to keep it off. Try it both ways and see what works for you. New versions of CyanogenMod also allow you to choose how much RAM compcache sets aside as virtual swap space, so you can play around with that as you so choose.


JIT: JIT is a Java compiler available in Android 2.2. Enabling it won't give you a big speed increase as far as small apps, loading the home screen, and other such niceties, but it will likely give you a big speed boost in intense applications, like games.


Lock Home in Memory: This is similar to the LauncherPro memory features we discussed above, as it attempts to do exactly what its name implies: keep your home screens in memory so that it doesn't have to keep redrawing them all the time. I'd recommend enabling this if you have the memory for it.


VM Heap Size: This is one of the more interesting settings. the VM heap size is the maximum amount of memory an application is allowed to allocate. Resource-intensive apps will require a larger VM heap, while simper apps don't need as much. You'll want to play around with this setting, but you should be able to tell after going through the other settings what setting you'll want here. If you allocating tons of memory to LauncherPro, or your have JIT enabled for resource-intensive applications, you might want to try 32M. If you're trying a more minimalistic approach to everything, you might find 16M or even 12M boosts the speed of your phone considerably.


With all these settings, try changing just one at a time and see how your phone responds over the course of a day or two. Everyone's settings will be different; there is no one size fits all here. Depending on your phone, the apps you use, how you've set up your home screens, and other tweaks you've made, your phone will respond differently to different settings. So, if you're dedicated to messing around with them, go for it—otherwise, you'll probably just want to leave them at their defaults (which are set on a per-model basis, for what it's worth). Also note that if you start messing with these settings, you never know what might happen, so many developers won't let you submit bug reports if you've changed the defaults. And, of course, always always always make a backup.


There's no doubt some of these tips are easier than others, but no matter who you are, there should be some tweaks here that help you out. While everyone's phone is different, it's likely many of you have found certain tweaks more effective than others, too, so share your own tweaks and the results you get with the above with each other in the comments.

Send an email to Whitson Gordon, the author of this post, at whitson@lifehacker.com.