Category: Tech

Dear Facebook

Dear Facebook

As much as I hate to drag you into this ugly mess I feel it is necessary to let you know that Vodacom (a cellular phone operator here in South Africa and a subsidiary of Vodafone) is messing with your copyright. I’m not a fan of copyright at the best of times but I think it is important to send a very stern message to any ISP who feels it is okay to inject html on web pages their customers are trying to view.

The offending bit of HTML which is served whenever anyone requests your website is a link to their own “Vodafone Live” service which in many ways is a competitor to Facebook. Below you can see a screenshot of your page (which is copyright 2008) and just below it, the injected link. This is an unauthorised derivative of your original copyright work.

And here you can see some of the content on the page which they link to:

Screenshot

If you let them do this they might be overwriting your advertisements next.

Regards
Jonathan Endersby

Big Ideas

The internet gives everyone the opportunity to be surrounded by smart people. I think one of the tenets of being a geek, whether you’re a programming geek or a hair stylist geek, is that we love to surround ourselves with people who are a hell of a lot smarter than us. For instance, I would love to go work at CERN; a place where I am at a loss for an analogy to reference my relative stupidity. However, I would absolutely love every second of it… even if I walked around confused by everything I heard or saw… on some level I would take some stuff in and leave wiser. I think, as I said before, this is one of the differences between geeks and non-geeks.

I’ve found that a lot of my non-geek friends try and avoid situations where they might look dumb because they fear that it will reflect negatively on them. Perhaps true geeks have realised that there is always someone else who is a hell of a lot smarter than you, so there’s no point in trying to look clever. Obviously geeks revel in being the smart one and teaching others, but this is also part of being a geek: we love to teach because we make the world a better place by doing so. It’s also possibly why geeks are so incredibly fanatical about things like programming languages… because we believe that by convincing someone to switch from PHP to Python will make the planet a better place… and we’re probably right.

Which is all a very long introduction to the guy who made this:


Embedded video Big Ideas (don’t get any) from James Houston on Vimeo.

You want to jump to about 1.10′ for the music. Anyway, the guy who put it together has a blog, read it.

In his own words
Based on the lyric (and alternate title) “Big Ideas: Don’t get any” I grouped together a collection of old redundant hardware, and placed them in a situation where they’re trying their best to do something that they’re not exactly designed to do, and not quite getting there.

This speaks volumes to me. I like to imagine that the old hardware really all want to make music and this is their best effort an effort which, albeit rough around the edges, translates to something beautiful. Mankind’s quest to understand time and space is similarly rough, but we’re on our way.

Over and out.

Codewar

pre{
font-size:1.2em;
}
Programming is about elegance. Yesterday someone asked me how to write a program that displays six unique random numbers (1 to 9). The beauty of this problem is that it is exceedingly simple to solve, but still leaves room for some awesome-source.

Here’s the simple solution in PHP (I make no claims to this being awesome):

$used = array();
for($i=0; $i<6; $i++){
	$x=rand(1,10);

	while(in_array($x,$used)){
		$x=rand(1,10);
	}

	$used[] = $x;
	echo $x . ' ';
}

Notice that this isn’t a battle for who can do this in the least lines.

I duly expect to be beaten on the head for some or other bad PHP habit. I’m also expecting people to submit the solution in Perl, Python, Erlang, Ruby, C, C++, Java and anything else you feel like trying your hand at.

ps. Wrap your solutions in <pre> tags.

Good Robot, Bad Robot.

I dealt with two robots on Friday. One good and one Bad.

The good robot was at Cavendish (A nearby shopping mall). When I drove into the parking garage I noticed that above every parking bay was a little sensor with either a red or green light on it. Red meant taken, green meant free. This means that from the one side of the garage you can easily spot an open bay… Combine this data with a direction system and you have digital arrows above the lanes that point you towards open bays. I drove in, the arrow said turn left, I turned left, another arrow said turn left, I followed and then bam, there’s my open bay. I realise that the electronics and software involved in something like this is all really not all that complicated, but when put together it forms a flawless system that just works ™. I love technology like this; stuff that is so simple yet so effective. No more driving around aimlessly looking for that mystery bay, no more getting stuck at dead ends with 6 cars behind you. The only tragedy of systems like this is that it’s so simple to “use” that we’ll take it for granted within no time.

Henk Kleynhans wrote an interesting post a few days ago about why software developers should do tech support. I agree with Henk and I think I have some additional insight. One of my biggest projects was building a pretty large system that managed the day to day business of a very large online travel company. It was a CRM, ERP, Accounting, Web Analytics etc etc application that was for the most part born out of being at the coal face and seeing what people were struggling with or what took more time than necessary. No one could have written a system specification for the final product… You just would not have been able to see all the opportunities in the beginning of the project, and you almost certainly would have ended up developing tons of functionality that someone thought was a good idea but would never have been used. The key to that project’s success was having a “no rules are good rules until proven so” attitude. This meant challenging every single process until it was as refined as it possibly could be. It meant that sometimes I would have to bang heads with some of the most ingrained procedures in the business, but ultimately the system was, and still is, a success. I still get a kick out of hearing people who initially moaned heartily about its introduction, now wax lyrical about its many virtues and how it saves them so much time etc.

Anyway, those three years, plus some “formal” education in the Business Analysis world, taught me to do what I’ve always done: Question Authority. If there was a procedure in place and it wasn’t immediately obvious why it was there, I had to find out why. And this is where I want to add to what Henk said. Not only should developers be taking tech support calls (which will essentially root out bugs and bad usability) but they should also, in the absence of good business analysts, be actively involved in the day to day running of the business, constantly on the look-out for better ways of doing things or areas where some software could improve the lives of the customer and the business operators.

There was nothing wrong with the Model T Ford. Tech support/engineers might have tightened some nuts or strengthened a part that kept on breaking, but essentially it would have stayed a Model T Ford. The engineers and designers who built the new Audi R8 have improved on decades of learning. It took engineering principles of “how can we make this quantifiably better?” and design principles of “How can we make this work better, feel better, look better etc” to end up with the R8. Henk’s developers are already on this journey with some of the functionality they’ve introduced… they’ve seen a problem that has two solutions. 1. The easy one, make the customer change some settings. or 2. The hard way, Figure out how to solve the problem once so that the customer doesn’t even know you’ve solved their problem. This is the same as the pretty lights in Cavendish… within a few years this sort of technology will be ubiquitous and young drivers will probably wonder why we need little arrows telling us where to go… I mean, a parking lot is easy, you drive until you find an open spot, right? Well, as anyone who’s ever been stuck in a busy parking lot knows, it is a painful experience.

Which brings me to my Bad Robot.
The City of Cape Town still thinks I live in Pinelands and still sends my electricity bill an address I used to live at about 10 years ago. This is despite numerous faxes to the contrary. Once again I found myself on the phone arguing with a call centre employee. They are unable to change my address over the phone because they need a fax. They can’t do it over the phone because I could be anyone. They can do it with a fax because a fax has a signature. They have no idea what my actual signature looks like. Ergo, anyone could send them a fax with a bogus signature on it, ergo, no safer than just doing it over the flipping phone.

I asked the girl if I could speak to her manager. I wanted to relay the vulnerability to someone more senior in the hopes that they might say “Hey, you know what? You’re right, that is a dumb rule”. Nope. The manager was busy (har har) and besides, “She can’t change the rules either”. “So who can change the rules?” I asked. “Nobody, they are rules” she said. “Nobody? I asked… “Surely Thabo Mbeki could change the rules, so maybe someone else high up in the municipality could change the rules too?”. She didn’t understand my example. She was a bad robot. She refused to question her rules, and in her painfully little world the rules were rules and you NEVER change the rules. I like to console my pain with the thought that the very fact that she can’t question rules is the reason that she works as a call centre employee and probably always will. It’s sad, but I guess the world needs droids.

Oh, and their fax number isn’t working. YAY!

over and out.
j.

Firefox 3 is almost upon us…

The latest in a long line of awesomeness and yet another brilliant example of Open Source kicking proprietary ass, Firefox 3 is coming out later today (at 7pm for those in the plus 2 timezone). In an attempt to get more rah rah, whizbang, Mozilla has put together a little Guinness book of records attempt to set the world record for the biggest number of software downloads in a day. I have no idea what the previous record was for, especially since Britney’s Limo Flash pictures can’t be considered “software”.

Anyways, hop along here and get it later on tonight. I will also be drinking that last Guinness in the fridge as part of my own personal celebration. Lynnae, you can have some too as long as you promise to upgrade at work tomorrow.

Download Day 2008

Oh you fanboys…

So yesterday my article on Android vs iPhone got picked up by macsurfer.com, something I generally would be rather happy with but my poor little server (and it is rather puny) didn’t seem to like what was happening and crashed a few times… Eventually I figured the safest thing to do (considering the threat of Polsmore style bandwidth charges) was to shut down apache and see how it felt in the morning.

I also think it’s important to say that I own a lovely shiny macbook. I do not hate Apple or their products and if you gave me an iPhone I would probably use it until something better came along.

Anyways, the funny thing about the crew over at macsurfer is that they tend to be a bit fanboyish.

Needless to say, here is my rebuttal to the 8 or so comments that made it through. A warning: what follows will be juvenile at best.

Quoth: “It’s impossible to predict far into the future of technology.”

Yes. you are quite correct. Should I not ‘ave a go then?

Quoth: It’s speculation

Yes, Again rather astute. Since it’s mostly written in the future tense and is not pretending to be a news site your observation is correct.

Quoth: Open source appeals to people for who the advancement of technology is their prime motivation.

And Tivo, and my mom, and a host of Fortune 500 businesses.

Quoth: Open source is a noble project, but it will only succeed where someone else sees how they can use it to make money.

Fare thee well my good knight.

Quoth: Can you imagine habitat for humanity toppling the major urban contractors? Doctors without borders displacing private practice medicine in North America?

Nope. Do I think it’s possible that one day more laptops will be sold running OSS than proprietary operating systems? Yes.

Quoth: As a consumer, you hope you have enough options that if one company is overcharging you can go elsewhere. The idea that things should just be ‘free’ is impossible…

Do you have a comprehension issue? Firstly, yes, you are right. When one company overcharges people will go somewhere else. Secondly, who suggested to you that Android phones will be free?

Quoth: Android will take off once someone figures out how to make money from it.

You mean these people?

Quoth: Of course, there is always the possibility that the world’s economic structure will fundamentally change and that human behaviour will suddenly NOT follow the path of least resistance.

How is buying a $750 phone the path of least resistance? I’d think that should be the Litmus Test for fanboy.

Quoth: So where are all of those open source desktops and laptops?

Look closely at numbers 3,6,12,13,15,16 and 20

Quoth: Your entire article is nothing by a wild guess and FUD.

Did it scare you?

Quoth: Bullshit in EVERY way! I won’t even go into it, it’s just not worth my time to comment on such overrated bullshit speculation you have offered up…

Which is why I didn’t read the next 248 words you wrote.

Quoth: There is no advantage a truly open OS would bring to the iPhone.

Besides being open. Of course.

Quoth: If Apple wanted to make an iPhone with fixed buttons, they could do it today; they don’t need Android to do that.

Yes, but they won’t. Some other manufacturer will make a phone with a qwerty keyboard and together with Android will make that phone a viable iPhone competitor for the market segment that I fit squarely in the middle of.

Quoth: BTW, are you referring to the same “sheer innovative power of the masses” that managed to topple the iPod as the world’s best-selling DAP?

No, I am referring to the “sheer innovative power of the masses” that is responsible for Linux.

Quoth: Again, what does this have to do with Android? You’re talking about subsidized hardware, the economics of which apply equally to phones carrying Android.

I’m not talking about subsidised hardware at all. If Asus can sell an entire friggen laptop for $299 why should an iPhone cost $750. When you bought your macbook (that I totally know you own because you such a raging fanboy), was it subsidised by someone? Phones are only subsidised because when mobile phones first came to market they were ludicrously expensive and people couldn’t yet justify the huge expense for the “new fangled technology”. We need to break that trend. Do you like it when your carrier fools you into spending $750 and thinking you’re spending $199?

Quoth: What makes you think handset manufacturers will not intentionally cripple their own implementations of Android in order to push their own services or their carrier’s services?

Firstly, draw the line. There is a difference between handset manufactures and networks. In the US you guys have let yourselves get duped by your networks who “only bring in” and “only support” certain phones. The rest of the world has the freedom to use whatever (for the most part) phones we want on the networks WE PAY MONEY TO BE ON.

Secondly, an open platform is easily reflashed.

Quoth: You assume people even know what open source is. 99% of the general population do not know, or care about open source.

I make no such assumption. People do not care, but if my mom sees she can get a cool phone that does all kinds of cool stuff, she will buy it, whether it’s powered by fairy dust or anything else.

Quoth: They want simplicity, function, and a coolness factor, all of which Apple offers for $199 now.

You mean $750, but yes, I agree… People want simple, functional cool phones… They don’t necessarily want to pay $750 though. Remember, Apple can make an awesome Android phone and make it shiny and stuff… and charge $999 if they want… but they’ll be competing with other people and their shiny $250 phones.

Quoth: Googles efforts will be in vain due to the same business model PC’s face.

Shit, I forgot about that struggling PC market. Shit… maybe we should hold a telethon or get Bono to do a fund-raising concert.

Quoth: They are at the mercy of Microcrap, so their products are influenced by Microcrap’s crap.

Dude, Microsoft are so out of this picture it’s not even funny… They are irrelevant in the mobile phone market.

Quoth: The business model is flawed, since it does not give profit incentive to programers.

Except of course if those developers work for the phone manufacturers… Or, except of course if those developers happen to be the same freaks of nature who make things like Ubuntu. So, except for those two exceptions I totally agree with you.

5 Reasons Android will kill the iPhone (or Assimilate it)

Firstly let me just say that it’s pretty clear that Apple will sell about a gajillion iPhones in the next few years. I’m not debating that. What I am debating though is whether Apple’s stranglehold on the “actually practical and cool smart phone” market will live forever more.

Quite to the contrary, I predict that one day, Apple will switch to using Android… like they switched to using Intel when the realised that the Intel chips were unquestionably better than the PowerPC chips and they were bound to lose market share if they didn’t jump ship… and JUST like they switched to a unix kernel when they realised how crappy their own one was.

That’s right, I said it.

1. Open Source

Open Source will win any programming battle, eventually. Open Source doesn’t mean a bunch of long haired, unwashed hippies sitting in their basements coding up the next version of sendmail… These days it’s some of the worlds finest developers working at Google and a plethora of the rest of the world’s finest developers working at the various handset manufacturers. All of them with a single goal in life. To make the best mobile platform ever.

2. Innovation.

Android brings the promise of a truly open platform. Apple doesn’t think this way. They like to limit, enclose, encapsulate and encase anything they possibly can. While Apple’s approach has historically worked for them, the sheer innovative power of the masses will mean that Android phones will be doing things that will make Steve Jobs simultaneously cringe and salivate with jealousy.

Innovation doesn’t just mean software innovation. Personally I like the idea of a querty keyboard on my phone. I find it easier to work with than the iPhone interface, but if there’s one thing we know about Steve Jobs it’s that he hates buttons. For the most part (ipod etc) Steve’s button hating ways are correct, but there are 6 billion different ways people will be wanting to use their phones. Steve wants the world to be all be like him… Not all of us are.

3. Open Markets

Probably the most powerful force in the upcoming battle for smartphone supremacy is who can knock out good quality, powerful phones at affordable prices. The iPhone does not cost $199 dollars. It costs a hell of a lot more, they’re just letting you pay it off over 2 years. In Europe an unsubsidised iPhone 3G is going to start selling at 499 Euros… that’s $769 when you convert it back to dollars. That’s almost 4 times the subsedised price, which means that even if you factor in the fact that Apple products cost more in Europe than they do in the US, the real cost of the iPhone is still nowhere near $199. This is the era of EEE PCs

4. Greed.

Android is not greedy. Apple is. Apple specifically excludes functionality on the iPhone in order to increase the amount of money you spend with your carrier. For example, there is not SIP (or VOIP) client on the iPhone so you’re “forced” to pay your carrier’s voice rates rather than being able to make the call via SIP over a wifi link.

Android will have no vested interests and will be available to all manufacturers for free. This will mean that Android phones will have all kinds of cool functionality built into them that Apple, for sheer economic reasons, will resist putting in the iPhone.

The other interesting greed factor is what I like to call the “Windows Vista” shuffle. The idea is that everyone upgrades because there are all these cool new features you just *have to have*. The more we learn about Windows Vista the more we realise how blatantly it was an attempt from Microsoft to convert all those millions of 8 year old Windows XP owners into fresh revenue. Open Source’s approach has always been to squeeze every last ounce of performance out hardware and to support that hardware for as long as possible. This means you only need to upgrade when you really want or need to… not when someone else decides they want your money.

Greed is also the reason that Steve Job’s version of “worldwide” is actually only 30 countries… Every time Apple wants to start selling the iPhone in a particular country they have to go through a process of trying to find a mobile carrier in that country willing to sell their souls and rip off it’s customers. (Aapprently this isn’t hard but it does take time)

5. Google

Google has a lot of money and they’re on a mission to change the world. From search engines to Solar Panels, they’re trying their best to make the world a better place for as long as they have the power to do so. Whether you love them or hate them they have a track record of rocking the boat and Android might just be the depth charge that roundhouse kicks the iPhone into a brick wall.

As for the assimilation… lets just say that I wont be suprised if I one day in the not too distant future get to read “iPhone Touch – Now Powered By Android”

J.