Kill muthafuckas!!!

A peaceful Norway, where there's only 29 murders per year on average (29 per year). And then...

SUDDENLY

A guy picks up a machine gun and goes on a rampage. If it happened in USA, that at least would be understandable - that sure happens once in a while even in schools, let alone places where us grown ups hang out. But Norway? Possibly the most peaceful country on the fucking planet? Something's not right here.

But, turns out, it's not that simple. He wasn't just a disgruntled employee, or some trenchcoat mafia dude. No, he was a normal-looking guy. In fact, he doesn't look like a terrorist at all. He kinda looks like Julian Assange, but that's beside the point.

So anyway, what happened there? Official version is that a radical nazi dude has gone nuts, picked up a gun and shot a bunch of people. Unofficial version is a little more elaborate. A dude, who was peaceful, nice and everything, over time has become more and more radical, seeing the disgrace the Europe is turning to with help of their too-liberal government and its policies on accepting immigrants, and has become so outraged with their behaviour that he devised a plan, and slowly but surely implemented it. It wasn't an act of rage, it wasn't an outcry for something. It was a well-planned, politlcally motivated action. Yes, horrible, but still he had the balls to do what he believed was true. Not many people could have done it.

What was the reason? As i already said, it was all about immigrants. What's wrong with them? Well, according to some radical websites, the problem was that the government was acting against its citizens in favor of alien culture and alien people. Muslim-related rape had spiked, muslim-related crime had spiked, blablabla, the usual nazi stuff. What is different about myself is that i prefer to listen to both sides of an argument, and try not to pick a side unless i really believe i should do so.

And i did. And i pick a side coherent with this guy. Now, don't get me wrong - i am not a nazi, i'm far from being a racist, i'm anything but a radical. If anything, i was always actively against any kind of discrimination. But the way i see it - this had to happen. It may not be the best way to do it, but it's certainly is the most effective. What could be more alarming than a mass-murder in a safest and quietest country in the world? He was definitely the right guy for the right time. He did it all on his own, and for that i admire his courage in pursuing his beliefs. I am yet to see that kind of courage in the rest of humanity. I have also got hold of a copy of his manifesto, and i'm sure i'll have a read to see what this guy has to offer.

But anyway, back to the point - why did it have to happen? Well, for starters, just come to London and look around. How many actual englishmen will you see? Probably not many. The only area they will prevail is richer parts of London like Baker street. I don't equate poverty with moral qualities, but i think i can safely say that the poorer the area, the more crime rate it has. If you add inter-cultural frictions in there, the problem becomes orders of magnitude higher, because now there's more to disagree with apart from whose dick is bigger.

Also, the problem with another culture is that, well, it's another culture. Something that is considered normal in our culture (like eating pork) is viewed upon as a deadly sin in others. And while this is clearly a problem of muslims (if we take pork as an example) not having enough common sense to view it as an archaic tradition that should go away rather than a requirement for making it to heaven, it is still a problem (don't bother telling me that eating pork isn't a deadly sin, that's not the point). And bringing muslims into Europe makes it Europeans' problem too, because muslims don't like it and try to tell Europeans that it's supposedly bad. Of course, Europeans don't have a problem with muslims disagreeing with them, but that still leaves muslims disagreeing about that. In fact, some view it a disagreement enough to hate on people, or commit crimes, or do other things people won't normally do.

Some muslims even go as far as saying that for a woman walking around with her hair uncovered is asking for rape. Seriously, what the fuck? They come into my country and tell me what i should wear in order not to get raped by foreign immigrants that really shouldn't be there in the first place? See, that's another problem. In the western world, we have all these notions of humanism, feminism, equal rights and all that stuff that tires to make us civilized. Muslims are mostly living following the Sharia laws (well, at least, these are the laws they are demanding to introduce in the whole Europe). There are many documentaries about how muslims treat women (a guy even got killed for such a documentary), and these things surely point on the mentality of these people. They think the woman who doesn't cover her hair somehow deserves to be raped. Now i'm sick and tired of that European promisciousness and half-naked girls walking around everywhere, but seriously, raping a woman for not covering her hair? That's exactly the problem. They don't have a problem with certain things we consider being "bad". I know there's no absolute "good" or absolute "bad", but for fuck's sake, if you come to Europe, better respect local culture and what Europe considers "good" and "bad", or get the fuck out.

Why is this so much of a problem? Because they invade. There are growing numbers of muslims in Europe, and USA, and even places like Russia. They don't come to Europe, they invade it. They surely have a reason to get the fuck out of their poor countries, right? So why make Europe another Albania if they fleed from there in the first place?

Another problem with all these small and hot-blooded nations is that they don't seem to be able to hold a dialogue. They can't just say stuff in a civilized manner. They have to kill you, rape your wife, slaughter your family, curse all your ancestors and all your descendats and piss on your grave if they disagree with something that you say or do. They don't accept the fact that there can be an opinion and belief different from what they have come to know, believe and understand. We have a free society, but freedom of one man ends where others' freedom begins. Somehow they miss that. Bear in mind that i'm not talking about Islam exclusively here, i'm talking about a pattern of behaviour of many alien cultures.

For fuck's sakes, we don't come to Japan and tell them how to live. We don't come to UAE and tell them to dump their stupid Sharia laws and implement European laws instead. We don't rape women that wear these stupid ninja suits. Why should we? It's not our land, it's not our culture, it's not our fucking business what they do or don't do in there.

Now, someone might argue that we actually do exactly that, but the reason "we" (the white population) invade Iraq and tell all these other Middle Eastern countries what to do and how to live is not because we want them to have democracy, or because we somehow care for oppressed people. No, the reason is, and always was, money, oil and power. This has nothing to do with "telling them how to live". This is an unauthorized, unreasonable and absolutely fucking wasteful and bullshit military action that should go away.

Another someone might also argue that there are good people, and there are bad people. I don't see how this is an excuse, but at least our position is understandable - we built our world, we have our own scum, and we don't want any foreign one contributing to scum numbers. It's like as if you're going to a wedding and shit on the wedding cake - not only you disrespect the fact that it's a wedding, it's also not your wedding.

The main point of this whole chaotic piece i just wrote is the question - is it feasible to have a multicultural society? My opinion is - yes, it is possible, but with a big big big limitation. Cultures should be compatible with each other. If i was a european, and i went to USA - i would perfectly blend in, because i won't be so much different. I can have certain disagreements with how USA deals with copyrights, i might originate from some obscure place like Russia or Canada and thus have some cultural heritage in that area, but otherwise i'd still be very much a potentially well-behaved US citizen. Why? Because we share common values.

But what if i come from a culture, in which it's OK to rape a woman, or slap a woman in a face in case she does this and that? What if i come from a place where having several wives is fine? What if i come from a place where killing the whole fucking family just because one of them said a bad joke about my mother is considered normal and is encouraged? Would i have a place in the Western world? As much as i would like to say otherwise, no, i wouldn't. That ain't happening. In order to integrate well into the Western culture you have to thing the Western way, or at least learn not to interfere with whatever cultural surroundings you are living in. That means you have to be well educated in the first place, which isn't happening as long as these "other" cultures remain so fanatically religious.

Suicide solution

Ah, the drama. World economic crisis hasn't really ended, it has only started. Why? Because nothing really changed. Bunch of people received bailouts, whole lot of people didn't and lost their jobs, houses and lives, but did anything really change? No. Because to really change anything, you have to change the entire system instead of trying to patch up gaping holes in one that is already present but is inherently broken and will crumble sooner or later anyway.

But what is the problem with global economy? It's not really a problem with economy per se, it's got more to do with the trading system. The thing is, the very system encourages greed and actively discourages any kind of long-term thinking. Thus, in order to cure the problem and not the symptoms, one has to entirely replace the whole mechanism of global markets. And to be honest, the solution is really simple and consists of a really small number of things.

And no, before you start flashing your MBA's and economics doctorates, telling me that this thing is not that simple as i try to portrait it, i tell you - it is. If you think of it, any system, however complex it is, has a few core principles in its base, and if you change those principles - the system will adjust accordingly. There's no need to make a lot of adjustments, they will follow naturally as the market will try to adapt to new mode of operation. So fuck you and fuck your economic degrees. Here's what we gotta do:

• Kill the derivatives

Yes. Kill the derivatives. This is just legalized gambling, only difference being that really powerful players can actually influence the outcome. One can bet on Microsoft's stock falling and then assasinate Steve Ballmer - and win a whole lot of money on that. This is just not right. Derivatives are just money out of thin air.

• Kill the money market

Trading money for money is the worst kind of thing you can imagine. The money itself does not have any value, it's just a convenient method to exchange goods. It isn't a commodity. Again, money out of thin air.

• Forbid stock sales for 1 year after purchase

This will be a little confusing to most people, however it's really easy to explain. Stock was meant as a way for companies to make money by inviting investors to buy a part of a company. Investors will get some kind of rights, too - governance of the company, dividents etc. So basically, it's a win-win situation both for the company, and its shareholders - company gets shitload of money, shareholders get return from profits. However, nowadays no-one buys stock as an investment and as a way to make money. They buy stock to sell later sell them at a bigger price. In other words, the long-term nature of stock market has been overshadowed by narrow, short-sighted thinking nature of human greed. If it was forbidden to sell shares until a year after the purchase - there will be more healthy, long-term decisions made and way less market bubbles.

• Forbid money-making machines

Let the humans run the show. No, really, that's ridiculous - we now have machines that automagically make money, thereby making any human trader inherently on a losing side in short term decisions, because the machine is able to analyze and do stuff way faster than normal human can. The real advantage of human lies in the long term, because the machine has no way of knowing the outcome of this or that decision made by a company. It will, eventually, but anyway, the market should be run by people, because coupling infinite mental resources of a machine with human greed will result in disaster - with humans we at least can limit the impact of our greed.

These four simple things need to be done. The rest of the market will follow. If you boil it down to one basic principle, here it is - encourage long-term thinking and limit the impact of our greed.

Offended

Having just watched "Sucker Punch" (and finding it an insanely cool movie with hot chicks and top-notch soundtrack), i went out on the Internets to see if there's anyone else thinking it's cool too. To my disappointment, i found that barely anyone actually enjoyed the movie. By the way, i could say the same about e.g. Coen Brothers' "Burn After Reading", which i found absolutely fantastic (and use lotsa quotes from there in real life) and on par with Coens' other works (Lebowski being my all-time favourite right until Burn After Reading came out). "Burn After Reading" didn't appeal to the majority too - as if people don't understand such elaborate (if black and ironic) humor and prefer dick jokes instead.

But anyway, not many people actually enjoyed the "Sucker Punch". At least a lot of critics didn't. Not that i trust critics - quite on the contrary, i try to always have my own opinion - but anyway, if almost everyone is saying the movie sucks - well, it's either something wrong with me, or they just watched it with their eyes closed. Or maybe it's just taste, with which i'm perfectly fine by the way. I don't care for people who didn't like the movie just because, well, they didn't like it. Either it didn't appeal to their precious selves, or they are gay and have no desire for hot chicks, or something else - whatever, it's fine with me.

What is not fine with me is all these reviews focusing on feminism, on female empowerment, revenge, sexual violence and whether this movie represents this or that in bad perspective... You know, talks from all these people that walk around trying to find something to be offended about, and whine at us normal people until we put their whining into legislation (which we shouldn't, but sadly we do). All these feminists, psychologists, all these fat mommas that have nothing better to do than to tell me which movies i should watch and how should they look like.

What these people don't quite understand is really simple - it's a fucking movie! It's not a psychology educational film, or a manual of some sort - this is form of entertainment. Hell, i'm not racist, sexist or anything, but i love racist jokes, i love sexist jokes, i love boner jokes, i love nationality-related jokes (a good example is Hitler or jew jokes to German people), i love hot chicks in movies, i love violence, i love over-the-top bullshit. I love them not because i'm violent sexist, but because it's enterntainment. It's fun. I don't watch Kill Bill and then go out and slice people in half, because i do actually understand that a movie is a movie, and reality is totally different. I watch movies precisely because i want to get away from reality and i want the director to tell me an interesting story. If it's full of hot chicks, violence and racist humor - that's even better, because it's fun to watch. When i watch a movie, i don't care a single bit about if it objectifies women, or if it makes a statement on feminism, or if it discriminates against jews, or if it makes killing kittens look like a right thing to do. I just don't care. I know it's a movie, and i'm not dumb enough to be needing a "don't try this at home" sticker on it.

And guess what - i didn't need that sticker back when i was 6 years old. I grew up watching those cool movies like Wraith, Rambo, Terminator, and guess what - i didn't suddenly start killing anyone, or "objectify women", or whatever. If your kids repeat what they see on TV - get them the fuck away from TV and buy them books, for fuck's sake. Don't blame the TV - blame your stupid kids. If some muslim dork finds Allah caricatures offending - that's his fucking problem, because apparantly he has no sense of humor or is overly sensitive to certain subjects. If some fat bitch sees blood in a movie that's supposed to be violent and goes batshit crazy about it being bad influence on her kids - that's her fucking problem, not Tarantino's.

People don't seem to understand that anymore. Everyone's trying very hard not to offend anyone. Oh, let's not offend blacks. Oh, we have to account for muslims too. Don't forget the jews. And also Native Americans. And single moms. And feminists. And gay people.

IF YOU FEEL SO INSECURE THAT YOU GET OFFENDED BY A FUCKING MOVIE - THAT'S YOUR FUCKING PROBLEM.

Why is this a problem to me? Well, because at the end of the day, it's me who gets that politically correct not-offending-anyone bullshit they call entertainment.

Oh the conspiracy!

Recently, there been a series of over-the-top events - TSA abusing people in the name of security, Righthaven going on a rampage and is well on the way to destroying itself into oblivion... Somewhere in between those there's MPAA/RIAA, music executives getting charged with corruption... Then there are some patent wars between Apple, Microsoft, Google and Oracle, then there's Sony suing customers for modding their shitty console... Then there's this judge who says that WiFi is not radio communication, a debate of whether or not the monkey can hold the copyright... No shit, these cases are SO over the top it's way beyond ridiculous, and any human being with slightest bit of common sense will see that this is complete bullshit.

...But maybe that's exactly the point? What if people suddenly realized that if they don't do that, if they don't carry the intellectual property debate to the point of when it's beyond any common sense by any stretch of imagination - then we will end up in even more bullshit? Because, you know, put a frog in hot water - it'll jump out, put a frog in cold water and slowly warm it up - it'll boil there. We tend to get used to things. And recently there's been a gradual process of tightening the ropes around our necks, and somehow the majority misses that.

Maybe all these people are martyrs, who destroy themselves just to show how ridiculous it all has become? I would seriously want to believe that - actually, this would completely restore my faith in humanity.

The age of Me, Myself and I

People has always been selfish. In fact, self-preservation is our most primary motivation to whatever we do. It helped us prevail in battle against nature, and we sort of came out as winners. The problem is, there are two types of self-preservation - smart, and dumb.

Smart self-preservation is, well, smart, because in this case the entity in question tries to preserve itself in a way that is feasible in the long run. For example, take mushrooms. Just plain wild forest mushrooms. They are symbiotic organisms, meaning that when they attach to, say, a tree, they don't kill it. They don't eat up all the resources the tree has. Instead, they take some and give something back. Almost all the plants on earth are symbiotic in a sense that they, while certainly consuming oxygen and producing CO2, on the other hand use sunlight to consume CO2 and produce far more oxygen than they consume in their normal breathing process.

In other words, nature, for the most part, is symbiotic. It preserves itself. All the elements are interdependent, and, more importantly, serve a common goal of smart, long-term self-preservation. Even when an animal, or a tree, or whatever else dies, it becomes food for other surroundings. Everything is recycled, everything is highly sustainable and efficient.

In case of dumb self-preservation, however, the entity in question behaves more like parasite. It enjoys itself while it lasts, grabbing everything it can and can't handle, and is not concerned about long-term benefits, putting short-sighted parasitic self-preservation ahead of everything else. What is self-preservation in the short term becomes self-destruction in long-term, because killing your own habitat, your source of life force is not the smartest thing to do.

And no, this isn't another environmentalist rant, i hate environmentalists no less than politicians. This isn't about environment. This is about us. People.

Very few of us engage in self-preservation in a way that is even somewhat sustainable in the long run. And i'm not talking about nature, no. I'm talking about how we treat each other. We lie. We cheat. We steal. We destroy. We squeeze out every single drop of whatever we need, exhaust and move elsewhere to do the same.

Why is this such a big deal? After all, we've been doing this for milleniums, and somehow we're still alive. What's the problem?

Well, the problem is that while people don't change, our possibilities do. We can do more than we could do fifty years ago, hundred years ago, thousand years ago. Now, with modern technologies, globalized economics and weapons of mass destruction, we can cheat, steal and destroy on a much bigger scale than we ever could dream of just a couple of decades ago.

Bank crisis in USA crushed global economy. Just think about it - the whole fucking world has crashed into oblivion because some dumbass bank executives made whole lot of short-sighted decisions that are beneficial in short-term, but disastrous in long-term. European industry is dying because a few assholes thought that it's cheaper to outsource everything to China or India. Yes, it was cheaper in short term, but in the long run it killed what was left of European industry. Neither Europe, nor USA are major goods manufacturers anymore - all we "manufacture" is intellectual property, which while being a good thing is absolutely useless as a long-term investment. You can't build a spaceship with a bunch of software patents.

The problem is that we are moving towards our own self-destruction, disregarding both our past, and our future. All that matters for most people is now. And that's really sad, because they don't seem to understand that "now" once was the future. If we continue doing things as we do them now, in a few decades there might be no "now" anymore. It is such a shame that we're given so much power, and we waste it on useless bullshit and to take advantage of each other.

The land of intellectual property™

There's something going on with the world now. Everybody keeps suing each other. Oracle sues Google, Apple sues Samsung, Samsung sues Apple, Nokia sues Apple, Apple sues Amazon and sends a cease-and-desist letter to an open-source project, Microsoft (and bunch of other guys) sue Apple, Lodsys suing Google, Apple and small developers... And that's just the tip of the iceberg. It seems like there's no more innovation going on, only established forces trying to undermine competition.

The greatest hypocrisy of all this is that when those forces themselves are caught copying, or are on the receiving side of ridiculous lawsuits - they seem to behave differently. Take, for example, the recent Microsoft whining over Google's Nortel purchase. Google tries to monopolize the market, unfair competition, yada-yada - but wait, isn't that exactly what Microsoft was doing since, like, forever?

The earlier mentioned lawsuite involving Apple and Samsung - Apple sued Samsung claiming that Samsung blatantly copies iPhone. OK, fair enough, I have the Galaxy S, i admit it looks very much like iPhone, and Galaxy S II looks pretty much like iPhone 4, and Galaxy Tab looks like iPad 2. On the other hand, there aren't a lot of ways one can make a touch-enabled phone, or a tablet. They will end up looking awfully lot like each other in any case. The tablet concept isn't new, so isn't the iPhone form-factor - Apple didn't invent them.

Apple also claims that Samsung's TouchWiz looks and feels like iPhone's launchers. OK, so what? It's not like iPhone UI is entirely original either. And let's not forget a poor guy who's app got rejected and has later appeared as part of iOS. So no, everyone copies everyone, this is called competition. If someone makes a better use of someone else's idea - why the fuck not (the guy could even have a chance to screw Apple as there was something similar in the past)?

It seems like whenever a big corporation copies someone else's ideas that's OK, but whenever they see their stuff copied the same way - it's somehow bad. It's not, copying is essential to what we do. Copying is fundamental aspect of learning and creativity. You can't go anywhere without copying others. Of course, using someone else's effort isn't exactly ethical, but that's how open-source works. That's how innovation and competition works.

If you can't think of something entirely new - look around and make use of what is available. Android seems to grow just like that - it largely incorporates different ideas. They might not be all that original, but they do it right (mostly). If you can use someone else's idea and improve on it (or even just adapt to your situation) - why not?


However, the most funny things now happen in the field of copyrights and the whole shebang - DMCA, MPAA/RIAA, ICE and others. Really, you just have to look at the timeline of some libertarian website like Techdirt to see these guys in action:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110622/11170114805/uk-rightsholders-want-web-censorship-dont-want-public-to-be-part-conversation.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110619/23422614744/ridiculous-assertion-righthaven-ruling-threatens-open-source.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110622/09371114804/mpaa-directly-lobbies-law-enforcement-to-be-its-own-private-police-force.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110621/17003314793/how-long-until-riaa-kills-best-music-service-around.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/04343514759/disney-when-we-copy-its-inspiration-when-you-copy-its-infringement.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110621/22414214796/collateral-damage-hunt-lulzsec-fbi-takes-down-bunch-websites.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/11130314767/prosecutors-vermont-dont-want-limits-computer-search-warrant.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110621/22280214795/mexican-congress-moves-forward-with-effort-to-refuse-to-sign-acta.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110619/22572414738/intellectual-property-infringement-thats-why-we-have-this-rice-to-eat-today.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110621/13015914790/new-filing-explains-how-domain-seizures-violate-first-amendment.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/16364214774/did-universal-music-declare-50-cents-own-website-is-pirate-site.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/11441714768/copyright-holders-claim-that-they-should-get-to-decide-any-copyright-exceptions.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/23383214779/righthaven-loses-big-yet-again-cementing-two-previous-issues.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/10505614766/microsoft-still-claiming-that-it-can-use-dmca-to-block-competing-xbox-accessories.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110619/23440114745/return-to-days-hoovers-enemy-list-fbi-raiding-activists-as-terrorists.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110619/23410614742/giant-breweries-get-laws-passed-wisconsin-to-make-life-hard-small-breweries.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/04351314760/bittorrent-sued-patent-infringement.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/13271614771/appeals-court-realizes-hot-news-makes-no-sense-dumps-injunction-theflyonthewall.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/02535014751/sony-continues-suing-people-who-help-others-modify-their-ps3s.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110619/22543014737/righthavens-biggest-fan-copies-content-as-part-his-argument-against-copying-content.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110620/01370314750/universal-music-goes-to-war-against-popular-hip-hop-sites-blogs.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110516/19214314291/many-killers-music-industry-digital-era.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/03043214263/many-killers-music-industry-analog-era.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110522/22211914385/john-lennon-copying-others-music-its-not-rip-off-its-love.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110617/03142314726/indie-label-opts-out-apple-icloud-music-match-says-its-insult-that-tramples-copyright.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110617/04014414727/why-is-justice-department-pretending-us-copyright-laws-apply-uk.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/16480114722/senators-unconcerned-about-massive-unintended-consequences-criminalizing-people-embedding-youtube-videos.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/03443314715/is-using-photo-without-credit-separate-violation-dmca.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110614/02375914684/summit-entertainment-may-learn-that-you-cant-file-copyright-takedown-over-trademark-issue.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/03555214716/us-porn-company-wins-default-judgment-against-file-sharer-canada-guy-told-to-pay-64k.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110612/16170614663/mystery-writers-america-real-writers-dont-self-publish.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/10303314718/kutiman-continues-to-make-amazing-new-music-via-musical-collage.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/04035014717/those-who-settled-with-righthaven-consider-taking-action-righthaven-threatens-them-with-more-suits.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110616/01431614712/french-government-looks-to-create-great-firewall-france.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110615/14240014708/us-trying-to-extradite-uk-tvshack-admin-over-questionable-copyright-charges.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110614/13195214690/wisconsin-kills-wiscnet-because-only-good-infrastructure-is-att-infrastructure.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110615/03055214706/denver-post-sued-over-righthaven-connection.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110622/02043814800/facebook-roger-ebert-pointlessness-jerk-patrol.shtml

These are just a few entries you would find in there - many more are likely to appear. There's just so much bullshit in there it's not even funny anymore. Everyone's fighting for freedom abroad while locking down their own country more and more.

Skype, open up, or i'll kick your ass!

Some russian guy has claimed that he sort of reverse-engineered the skype protocol. Sort of - because he didn't completely reverse it, and it is an old version of skype, which isn't compatible with modern skype versions. He says the goal is to make skype open-source.

Now, i understand the motives. I think the guy is doing the right thing. All the marketing bullshit Microsoft is trying to sell us (IP infringement, spamming/phishing/scamming concerns etc.) is worth nothing. Actually, it makes me wonder - why are we having these news in the first place? What's the problem with open-sourcing the protocol?

Everyone knows skype on Linux sucks balls and has been in 2.5 beta for the last two years. Hardly anyone believes that it will improve much because of Microsoft's aquisition of Skype, given Microsoft's stance towards free and open source software. Everyone knows that skype is doing their business not on the protocol itself, but on third-party agreements (skype-enabled phones) and Skype-out services. If anything, open-sourcing the protocol would enable it to spread even more.

A pecuiliar detail is that the guy doesn't seem to disclose how exactly did he get the de-obfuscated Skype binary and all that code from VEST corporation. From what he writes on his blog it almost looks like he stole the code and the binary files, wrote a couple of lines of code and published it as if he did the majority of it. Of course, he doesn't claim that he did all this, in fact, quite the opposite - he repeatedly makes it clear that he actually has not done much himself. This raises another question, particularly that of his moral right to call his findings a "research" when in fact 90% (or even more) of the work was not done by him, and supposedly was not acquired through legitimate ways. However, let's leave it be for now. Microsoft will most certainly try to combat these efforts, but if Samba guys managed to pull off the reverse-engineering of MS protocol - there's no reason why anyone else can't pull of a similar stunt with Skype.


I think the problem is not the skype protocol itself. The first possible answer is purely business-based. If the Open-Source community will reverse-engineer the Skype protocol and open-source it - what will be the point for third-party phone manufacturers to make an agreement with Skype when they can take an open-source client and incorporate it into their phones without paying Skype? That will surely hinder a chunk of Skype's revenue stream.

Another possible answer is that they fear that the guys would uncover something in the protocol that is not very pleasant for the public to know. I don't remember exactly where and when i read this, but i remember reading about some US laws actually requiring the telecom providers to leave the backdoor open for government agencies to eavesdrop on conversations.

Now, i was looking for an alternative to Skype for a long time. Since i use multiple OS's, something cross-platform would suit me best. And i remember why i stayed on Skype in the end. I couldn't care less about HD video calls, conferencing and skype-out - all of this is available in the Open-Source domain as well - Ekiga being a good example. The reason why i still use Skype despite all its deficiencies, despite it not being open and all, despite Linux version sucking big cock, despite recent Windows version being bloatware, despite its Android version being incomplete (no video calls, no SMS), despite Skype not being the cheapest VoIP service, is simple - its superior firewall and NAT penetration capabilities. I simply can't connect to SIP network using Ekiga, while Skype always works flawlessly.

However, if the Skype reverse engineering project achieves its goal, switching to Ekiga or any other VoIP/SIP provider might not be necessary.

Terrorists win!

USA has finally shot down the Number One Terrorist, the most evil and feared man on earth... Or so they are trying to make us believe.

Why don't i believe that USA has killed Osama Bin Laden? Well, there are two big reasons. First of all, there's simply too much information that simply doesn't quite make up the picture. They track him down, get into a fierce fight and then kill him. Those brave SEALs guys (or whoever the fuck it was) do the Rambo thing, the whole world applauds, everyone's happy.

The biggest secret is... Why the fuck did they dump him at sea?! No, seriously, what the fuck? Aren't we supposed to see the guy? Is USA really expecting us to believe that they killed the enemy number one of the whole fucking world, and then dumped him to the sea just like that?

To me it looks kinda fishy. It is clear that the guys were doing something there, but Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with that. He didn't, and that's why they "buried the body in the sea" - no body, no problem. Hell, when Saddam Hussein was captured, they were broadcasting his execution to the whole fucking world - and now they get bin Laden and just dump him in the sea?

However, there is another reason i don't believe USA has killed Osama bin Laden. And the reason is that i don't think he ever existed. There may very well be Osama bin Laden somewhere in the Arab world, or even somewhere in the bin Laden family, but he wasn't the guy on the videos, he didn't bomb the Twin Towers and he didn't start no Al Quaeda. This whole bin Laden thing is just a hoax.

USA needed Pearl Harbour as an excuse to enter WWII. USA needed an excuse to enter Vietnam war, so they provoked an attack on their ships. USA needed an excuse to invade Iraq and start the whole "War on Terror" thing, so they allowed someone to bomb the WTC. It may not be an inside job, but to think that USA government had nothing to do with that is just pure nonsense. There are no terrorists, there is no Al Quaeda, there are no weapons of mass destruction, Islamic jihad or whatever. This is just one big pile of bullshit. What is the goal - we can only guess. Most probably money.

After all, what is so hard about asking a fellow Arab family (bin Ladens and Bush families are long time friends) to "lend" their name to a fictional terrorist, who would then be used as an excuse to bomb USA, invade a few Middle Eastern countries and make more money? Sounds like a plan to me.

iSpy with my little eye

Recently, another technological privacy-related scandal hit the news - this time it's Apple and its iPhone. Turns out, it tracks users' every step and gathers locational data. This is becoming something of a trend now - Google Buzz and Google Street View being particularly notorious.

However, what's most amusing is the reaction of public. Public goes "oh, iPhone tracks me? So what, i got nothing to hide". This is exactly the attitude that got every US and UK citizen under constant surveillance. I am not going to go on and tell you how much surevillance sucks and why exactly does it suck. If people don't give a fuck, that does not mean it is a good idea to exploit their ignorance.

No less amusing is the reaction of Apple. Apple first goes "no, this is bullshit, it's not tracking anyone", and then goes "uuuh, sorry, here's a patch that disables tracking".

What the fuck is that?! They, like what, didn't know?! Apple happened to not know that their own flagship product intentionally tracks people's location? Of course they knew. And they would get away with it if it wasn't for hackers to tear the OS apart and discover that thing. That is precisely why manufacturers are afraid of hackers - because they might have better skills than Apple's (Sony's, whatever) guys, and they aren't in it for the money.

However, this underlines a deeper problem. First of all, why this is happening at all?! Why manufacturers are allowed to get away with that shit? Why every device out there is trying to track its user's location? Government officials having access to such technology - OK, fair enough, i can at least relate to that (crime fighting and all), but private companies?! Come on guys, let's give any Tom, Dick and Harry my geolocational data, let us all live in harmony.

And second, why, when it is proven to be true, manufacturers can get away with "sorry, here's a patch"?! Next time someone catches me downloading movies from torrents i'll go "um, sorry, look - i deleted the movie".

No, seriously, this is bullshit. Aren't there any laws concerning misleading marketing materials? Of course, one can say that the words of Apple officials aren't considered marketing materials, but then what are they, if not another pile of marketing bullshit? When the company makes an official statement that is then proven to be not only wrong, but was an act of deliberate misinformation - shouldn't the company be held accountable for its irresponsible actions concerning such a sensitive topic and for trying to hide the facts so blatantly, when even software that reads that data was already released?

Maybe it's time for us to finally realize what open-source really means. Many eyes doesn't necessarily means more security, but at least it would be impossible to pull off a stunt similar to Apple's recent achievements.

Mobile

Sometimes it's very hard to understand those idiots who make mobile phones. For years they are pushing us useless shit - a glaring example is MMS. How many times in your life did you actually used MMS? I can tell you how many times i did. Two. In my enfire fucking lifetime. And it wasn't something i couldn't live without.

But this indicates a more global problem. These guys try very hard to make sure we believe we actually need all that stuff - MMS, GPRS, EDGE, UMTS, HD-cameras, MP3-ringtones, gigabytes of storage, big screens... Who the fuck needs all that stuff?! I can understand having connectivity on the phone, but camera? Video playing? No one in their right mind will watch movies on a small ass screen and actually enjoy the experience. No one will ever be able to take good photos with a phone camera, let alone video. No one with self respect will ever listen to music on mobile phone without headphones - and all those stupid MP3 ringtones sound so lame and make owners of those phones look lame too.

The problem is, the phones don't have a target audience. In my view, there are several types of users with drastically different goals and use cases. The first one is old people, and this is often the category of users left out by modern technology. Old people don't give a fuck about camera, or MP3 ringtones, or gigabytes of storage, or games - there are a lot of things, really. All they care about is BIG BUTTONS, BIG BRIGHT SCREEN and ease of use. There is a reason why they wear glasses, after all. Such a phone should not be small (i.e. easily lost), should be as loud as possible, and should contain absolute minimum of functionality - address book (without all those "home number" shit - just name and number), SMS, Bluetooth and some MIDI ringtones. That's fucking it - a phone like this will be VERY popular in older people circles. And not only that, there is a group of people that are not old but still don't give a fuck about all those technologies.

Another group of people is technocrates like me. We want all to the maximum - processing power, connectivity options, GPS, RFID/NFC, camera etc. And a shitload of battery power. Here also fall the business people who need a phone as a workhorse. And a third group of users are cheapskate facebook-inhabiting assholes who need something in between.

Now the bi gquestion is - why do we need a hundred of cheapskate models? Why do all phones necessarily need to be lighter and with a cheesy design? Take a look at Apple phones - they actually have one. It is well designed, it is suitable for a wide range of needs, and it is heavy enough so you can actually feel it in your hand. I want to feel my phone. I want it to be performant and unrestrained. If there was a phone that was solid and well made like and iPhone, and with Android OS - a LOT of people would buy it. And it will be successful. It will literally own the market. Like iPhone does.

Fucking idiots. Don't make millions of models which are same shit in different casing - make a couple "old people" models, a couple of "hi-end" models, and a few cheapskate models. If they work well - people will recommend them to friends and buy the new models when old ones are broke. The market will be owned by whoever gets the "less is more" idea first.