jjncj.com

So, due to lack of projects at my current employer, I might be getting laid off come Wednesday. Not the news one wants to hear.

If anyone has any leads for telecommuting tech jobs, please let me know. There is a link to my resume at the top-right of this page.

Thanks!

Today I was looking over the letter that came with our garbage bill, and saw that the City of Fairbanks was attempting to lower the cost of collecting garbage. They are doing three things. First, they are going to start working four 10-hour days instead of five 8-hour days. They say this will save them time doing their mobilizing and demobilizing at the beginning and end of the day. Makes sense. Second, they will only drive through a neighborhood one time on the collection day. Good idea. I didn't even know they did multiple passes as it was.

But the third way was the one that caught my attention:

We are installing GPS systems on our City packer trucks and have redesigned routes to maximize efficiency and reduce trips to the landfill.

I always love to see technology put to good use.

Now, if we can only get them to implement something like this system we could save them even more labor costs. And we'd be able to put yard waste in the bins without bagging it first!

...everybody has at least one.

And I, not to buck the trend, now have two blogs. Or 1.5, since I am not whole owner of this, the blog I share with my wife.

My new blog is to be found at joshuakugler.com. It is a blog that will focus mainly on tech stuff: programming, system admin, and computer topics in general.

And I have a new e-mail address, since bigfoot.com, after years of use, seems to now be having major technical problems. I am now reachable at:

joshua@joshuakugler.com

I hope you'll visit!

It's always fun to see companies reference other companies with which they work. VirtualBox is a software package that allows you run several different operating systems in their own virtual machines (like VMWare, Xen, etc). Their about box is great. They have the Suse Iguana (wearing a Red Hat), the Linux Penguin playing a tambourine emblazoned with the Ubuntu logo, the Microsoft "Butterfly," stars (alluding to Mandrake/Mandriva) rising from the fire, and the BSD Daemon eating a multi-colored Apple. No, VirtualBox can't boot OS X, but the apple is probably an allusion to Darwin, which I assume VirtualBox could boot, and upon which OS X is built. Did I miss any logos?

In the world of system Unix/Linux system administration, one of the statistics often quoted by system admins is their systems' "uptime." That is, how long has the system been up and operational since its last reboot. This is a conversation in which Windows system admins never join due to the fact that even the smallest system or software update often requires a reboot. My personal best? 500-plus days. Of course, I probably should have rebooted it in that time for some security updates, but for some reason it didn't get done.

It seems Linux admins will soon have even more bragging rights when it comes to uptime. A new project from MIT (where else?) has developed a way to apply security patches directly to a running kernel, without having to reboot. Unless an update makes large changes to the kernel (in this case, modifies data structures), a kernel update will not require taking the system down. Considering that a kernel update is the only reason to ever have to reboot a Linux system -- even hardware drivers can be updated without a reboot -- it might be possible to never reboot a Linux system, and still keep it up-to-date with all security patches.

More information at the Ksplice site. Very interesting stuff, indeed.

It's probably HDR.

I sometimes wonder how marketing types live with themselves. Their whole purpose in life is to convince us to buy things for which we have no need, and often lack the money. As George Foshee said, "We spend money we don't have, to buy things we don't need, to impress people we don't like." But I digress. I was talking about marketers. In addition to trying to convince us to buy things, sometimes they even take techniques, rename them, and then claim they invented them, as is the case in a press release I found today.

First, a little background. HDR (or High Dynamic Range) Photography is a method whereby you take several shots of scene at several different exposures, and then combine those shots into one. This generates a final image that captures much more of the range visible to the human eye. As usual, see Wikipedia for more.

So, today I came across a press release from a real estate web site. Under the pretentious headline "Arizona Firm Revolutionizes Real Estate Photography With New ELC Technology," they claim to have invented a technique called "Enhanced Lighting Compression" which promises to "[bring] new level[s] of detail & appeal to property photos." Hmm...sounds interesting. Let's read more.

This is how they describe the process:

ELC photography involves taking multiple simultaneous exposures with a specially configured digital camera. These images are processed at VMLH's studio, where they are integrated and enhanced with custom software that merges a series of images into one ELC photograph that can be printed, emailed or used on web pages as a standard JPEG photo file.

Sounds exactly like HDR, except for the "multiple simultaneous exposures" part, which is either complete hyperbole, or they have a special multi-CCD camera. Considering it is a marketing piece, I would assume the former, but if it is the latter, then it's still HDR photography, they just had someone make them a VERY expensive digital camera. And on their web site, they simply claim that "custom software" is "custom Photoshop settings."

And I could stop there, since it's pretty clear they they have simply renamed an existing technique and are trying to market it under a new name. But, there is other marketing-speak in the article that is just begging to be called out.

The new Enhanced Lighting Compression (ELC) system produces pictures that bring out far more of the details seen by the human eye, creating stunning images that have a hyper-real level of presence, clarity and immediacy.

"Stunning images?" Well, maybe, in that it's more range than you are used to seeing in a photograph. But no more stunning than a well-taken and well-lit shot of a house.

Brings out more detail? Yes, HDR photography does that. But "Hyper-real!?" Oh, sigh. The only references to hyper-reality I could find on Wikipedia (I know, not always authoritative) were Hyperreality, a term used in semiotics and postmodern philosophy; Hyperrealism, a school of painting; Hyperreal numbers, an extension of the real numbers in mathematics that are used in non-standard analysis; and a song. So unless they are talking about philosophy, math, or a realistic painting technique, their choice of words was completely meaningless. The images aren't hyper-real, they simply, as I stated, look like a well lit shot should.

"I tell people that ELC photos adds $100,000 to the value of their home," said Arizona realtor Kim Stoegbauer.

Right, about that "how do marketers live with themselves" question? Enough said.

If you take a look at the images at http://www.vmlh.com/elc/ (no I'm not linking to them, I have no desire to raise their Google rank), you'll see the sample photos don't look all that amazing. They simply look like a picture taken by a photographer who knew what they were doing.

For some examples of real HDR photography, and what it can do, take a look at HDR photos on Flickr. For an excellent example that shows how HDR can generate a picture showing detail in the bright areas, all the way down to the dark areas, see this image.

HDR photography is neat, and if they want to use it real estate, great! Actually, really great; have you seen some of the photos attached to houses for sale? Some of them are horrible. So, if they want to use HDR, that's fine, but at least call it what it is, instead of creating a new name, and claiming you invented it.

Oh, if you're interested in the press release, copy and paste this link: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-25-2008/0004779580&EDATE=

A search for a cure for cancer leads to a new, seemingly very efficient way, to do electrolysis: literally burning salt water for fuel. I want to convert my car over now.


Update with some more thoughts: I wonder how much salt you need per gallon. It'd be interesting to do the math on the cost. Of course, you don't need table salt. "Low grade" salt such as water softener or simply rock salt would work. The one thing the article didn't mention is how much radio energy it takes to cause release the hydrogen, and how much energy can be recaptured from the flame. You know, it's interesting: several months ago, the Elijah List had a prophecy about a new source of energy that was going to be found in the US. Could this be it? Can you imagine millions of cars running on salt water in a few years?

Update 2: Some more ideas. Can you imagine: A big feeder of rock salt, a grinder for precision deliver, and a tank hooked up to your water supply. Plus a boiler run on hydrogen. (Nearly) free heat for your house and then some. I'm giddy with the thought. I really hope the idea is bought by someone who will use it, not by someone who will bury it (think oil company).

As of right now, I've enabled a system called "reCAPTCHA" to prevent spam comments, not that I've gotten any spam comments yet. OK, a couple. But instead of being just an annoying roadblock to posting comments, reCAPTCHA is actually useful. The words with which you are presented when you make a comment are words that have been scanned from old books, but cannot be clearly read by the computer digitizing the books. So, to post a comment, you enter two words, one which is already known by the system, and one which is unknown. If your answer to the "known" word is correct, and your answer for the unknown word matches other people's answers, then that word is successfully digitized. You can get all the details on the reCATPCHA Learn More page.

Enjoy helping digitize old texts!

In response to Tristan's post which is in response to Aaron's post, the logo for Canonical is probably not accidental. Merriam-Webster defines canonical as:

of, relating to, or forming a canon

And a canon is:

a : an accepted principle or rule
b : a criterion or standard of judgment
c : a body of principles, rules, standards, or norms

But it also says canonical means:

conforming to a general rule or acceptable procedure

Which Canonical most certainly doesn't. Well, it may conform to free software, but certainly not to the widely accepted practices of proprietary software.

So, Canonical is a cannon designed to change/improve/destroy the currently canonical definition of how software is supposed to be created, sold and supported, thus forming the new software development canon? Sounds good to me.

It's nice to see Dell promoting Linux now that they are selling machines with Linux pre-installed. For a quick overview on what this Linux and Open Source thing is all about, take a look at this short video.

(Via: Joey Stanford)

For those of you who have been wondering what this "RSS" thing is, and who don't really know what I mean when I say "subscribe to updates from my blog," Common Craft has a cute little video entitled "RSS in Plain English." Check it out below, and if you have any further questions, drop me a line via the contact page.

Click To Play

Melissa Draper points out that every has their reasons for not adopting Linux. Whether it be the software they have to use, the hardware, or other reasons.

But she raises an interesting point: if your Linux-adoption hurdle is hardware compatibility, it is very likely you could buy Linux-compatible replacements for less than the cost of a Windows Vista upgrade. So if your hardware is keeping you from giving Linux a try, check out alternatives...it might be cheaper in the long-run.

It's happened! Dell has officially said it will support Linux! And what distribution will they officially support? Why, Ubuntu, of course. Details are still filtering out. Keep watching.

For details released before the official word, see this Desktop Linux article.

Woohoo!

UPDATE: More information on the Ubuntu site as well as the Dell site.

Mike Kruckenberg writes about a talk given at the 2007 MySQL User Conference. It seems the United States Navy is using MySQL running on four-node Linux cluster to handle operations aboard one of their aircraft carriers. Great to see Open Source getting its sea legs. Or is that improving its sea legs? Anyone know of other "nautical" Open Source applications or deployments?

Izzy has a good post about security, viruses, and myths. In it, he explores the "age old" question as to why there are no viruses for Macs. While, in the past, the answer may have been market share, the main reason now is the same reason there are no viruses for Linux, Solaris, or any operating system with a strong security model: You. Simply. Can't. Write. One. At least not one that will have any measureable affect.

Why? Two words: security model. In the non-Windows world, users run as normal users, and not as administrators. Any application or script compromised can only modify files owned by that user. Any attempts to modify system files or system binaries will be denied. Now, Windows Vista is supposed to solve some of this by making a user run as a normal user, and prompting for additional privileges when needed, but I've read it's so annoying, people are turning the feature off and running as administrator.

Another reason: bad software design. Example: scripts in Word documents and in Lookout, er, Outlook e-mails that run without user intervention, and e-mail themselves to everyone in your address list. Yes, KDE4 will have DBus-in-everything-even-your-toaster^®, but to my knowledge, scripts attached to e-mails will not run without user intervention. And if you run a script or binary attached to an e-mail, you had better know what it is (there are also the holes in MS products that can be used to lie about the type of a file: calling an executable file a jpeg, for instance).

Another choice that makes Linux a little bit more secure (not sure about Mac) is that any file on a web site or in an e-mail is either opened by the application that can view it (not execute it) or it must be saved and have its execute permission set. No accidentally executing a program attached to an e-mail here. Granted, you could say, "Open this EXE attachment with Wine" (a windows emulator) or, "Open this Python script attachment with the Python interpreter," but again, you must take an explicit action, and are warned that opening an attachment can compromise your system's security. [Disclaimer: I've not checked the behavior of Kommander scripts for KDE. Clicking on one may offer to open them with the Kommander script interpreter.]

But even if you open an attachment with malicious code, it is running as your user, and no files can be modified other than your own. Conclusion: the virus can't spread on the system, and it can't infect system files. The worst it can do is replicate itself (poorly) to the user's files and maybe other people in the user's address book. It can't install itself as a system service, install a key-stroke logger, or other such malicious behavior.

Note: If you have scripts in your home directory which you run as administrator, make sure they're owned by administrator and not by you. Hmm...need to check my ~/bin. But then again, if you have scripts in your home directory that you run as administrator, it probably means they are custom scripts that would be very hard to write viruses for anyway.

So, it all comes down to security and how it is enforced. If Microsoft wants a secure system, they should write an emulator for backwards compatibility, throw away Windows, and start from the ground up to design and write a secure operating system.