Ever upwards

WordPress Upgrade Chain:

Report bugs. Upgrades like this always make me nervous.

Papa Fly Productions and the nsn section should change over during the next couple of days, once I have kicked the tires here a bit.

[Update: 29 Jan 2007, 5:00pm] nsn portion upgraded to 2.1

[Update: 29 Jan 2007, 6:00pm] Papa Fly Films upgraded to 2.1. I was nervous about theme compatibility, so I made a full backup of the 2.0.7 install beforehand.

Time, and our imperfect orbit

In keeping with the dictates of thesis writing, and the sage comments of those who suggest that blog entries are not the best use of time, I resolve the following: posts on this blog between now and the completion of a draft thesis shall be limited to no more than one substantive and one narrative post per day, the latter to generally include a photograph. Posts that pertain directly to the substantive content of the thesis, as designated by the M.Phil Thesis category, are exempt from these restrictions.

An article in Harper’s that I first took up because of its hyperbolic title – “Clash of the Time Lords: Who will own the measure of our days?” – is actually a really interesting demonstration of how human beings try to make the world fit within our understanding.

In particular, the article hinges on the fact that the second has two distinct definitions. The first is based on astronomical phenomena: 1/86,400th of a day, that being 1/365.25th of the time it takes for the Earth to orbit the sun. The second is based on the extremely precise oscillation of cesium atoms, the measuring stick used in atomic clocks. Specifically, it is 9,192,631,770 oscillations. The trouble arises from how those two are not the same; the Earth does not sweep through its orbit with perfect precision. Rather, it wobbles, hits things, and slows down. As such, astronomical time ‘slows down’ as compared with atomic time.

Right now, this is corrected for using occasional leap seconds. Every time the Earth has lagged behind atomic time by one second, one second is added to the reckoning of atomic clocks. Since our orbit continues to slow, leap seconds need to be inserted with ever greater frequency. This is good for astronomers, since it lets them continue to aim their telescopes in the same way as before. What is more controversial is whether this is a sensible system overall.

From a galactic or universal perspective, it doesn’t seem too reasonable. Ultimately, it is a throwback to the era when it was believed that the Earth occupies some metaphysically special place in the universe. When we concede that it is just one of uncountable numbers of things zipping about under the influence of gravity and other forces, the idea that time should be altered to correct for the peculiarities of its orbit becomes a difficult one to maintain, for any reasons aside from the practical ones of astronomers. Consider, for instance, the question of whether it would be appropriate to subtract a period of time if a comet or asteroid impact cause the orbit of the Earth to speed up.

That said, there are a good number of practical reasons to consider fiddling with time to match our orbit. The disjoint between calendar time and astronomical time is the reason for the piecemeal and difficult shift the world has made from the Julian to Gregorian calendars. Indeed, the point was to return key astronomical events, like the equinoxes, to the points in the calendar where they ‘should’ be. That shift famously required the negation of eleven days. For those who followed the decree of Pope Gregory XIII, they were October 5-14th, 1582. People in the UK and US didn’t switch systems until later, erasing September 3-13th, 1752. As such, the measure of time differed be eleven days across the English channel. When the US and UK did make the switch, the passage of calendar time was re-aligned with the experience of astronomical time.

Over thousands of years, allowing atomic time to rule, and diverge to an ever greater extent from astronomical time, would shift the seasons into ever different positions within the calendar. Very slowly, sunrise and sunset times would get out of sync with the times of day when they previously happened: likewise, the solstices and equinoxes. Already, the GPS satellites, which rely critically on super precise time, are 14 seconds ahead of UTC (Coordinated Universal Time). This is because they have not been counting leap seconds. Time in Unix computer systems also ignores leap seconds. As more leap seconds are added to UTC, that gap will grow.

Perhaps this is the most obvious solution: acknowledge the split and come up with two separate accountings of time: one that just counts the oscillations of those cesium atoms and thus the actual number of atomically defined seconds that pass, and another that corrects those figures for the peculiarities of our passage through space. Most people would probably only bother with the latter, but having the former as a kind of absolute record of how much time has passed since event X strikes me as more honest.

PS. Slightly related to the above is this excellent comic about dinosaurs planning to steal the prototype kilogram (the actual hunk of platinumiridium that defines the unit of mass).

Document incompatibilities

The members of the M.Phil in International Relations programs have collectively embraced Macintosh computers. The only machines you ever see during our seminars are MacBooks, Powerbooks, and my lonely iBook. At the same time, Microsoft Word has generally been embraced by the academic community. I get about half a dozen Microsoft Word attachments from fellow students, instructors, and mailing lists every day. Every academic journal with which I have had experience (both editing and submitting) has used MS Word as their normal document type.

As such, the following error is especially infuriating. If you add images to a Microsoft Word document being produced on a Mac (in this case, a Venn diagram for my failed states paper), it will may load in Word for Windows with the following error:

QuickTime and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

First off, shame on Microsoft for not making documents from two pieces of their own software properly interchangeable. Secondly, shame on Apple. They say that Macs are machines for use in serious professional environments, and yet problems like this exist in the single most essential piece of professional software. This, and some other weird incompatibilities relating to fonts and formatting, make me a bit nervous about writing my thesis on a Mac, to be taken to a print shop that will almost certainly be using Windows machines.

People will say to switch to OpenOffice, but that is like replacing your car with a buggy because you don’t like the controls on the stereo. OpenOffice, like Linux, simply isn’t worth the bother in a world where everyone is using a near-ubiquitous alternative.

On a semi-related note, I am strongly considering using a non-standard font for the thesis (either Bembo or Perpetua, perhaps). Is it possible to have a document printed in a font that isn’t particularly standard, or will I get back something switched over to something generic but similar? If you turn a document using a non-standard font into a PDF, can people who do not have that font view and print it properly?

Web 2.0 wandering

Muddy river near The Trout

A post on Metafilter led me to a long-winded essay about why blogging is a fundamentally cynical activity. Then, a comment on the MeFi post led me to a page that randomly generates text that sounds like a piece of postmodern criticism. It was amusing and memorable enough to add to del.icio.us. From the blog run by the person who wrote the script, I found the video to Pink Floyd‘s “High Hopes,” which looks like the recollections of someone who did far too many drugs while they were at Oxford. I recognize the type of places, but not the places themselves. It must be Cambridge.

The above is some kind of amazingly self-referential romp around some of the cleverer sites out there driven by user-submitted content. These people are the “You” that Time Magazine saluted. Collectively, the contemplation of all this technology and effort gives one a sense of trivial empowerment. It’s interesting, and it takes up time, but it doesn’t get us anywhere. At least, no more so than sitting around and listening to music. At least, in its curious way, it is a social activity.

Sandwich economics

The following is a factor price breakdown for the combination that comprises more than 80% of my lunches (n=28):

Sandwich factor pricing

The cheese in question is either Cheshire or Wensleydale: certainly the two best foodstuffs that I have experienced for the first time while in England.

The surprising factor is clearly the cost of tofu. That said, I do use about 62.5g worth per sandwich. It still seems unfair that the least tasty part of the sandwich should cost the most. If I do end up going to London this weekend – as now seems highly likely – I can pick up some much lower cost tofu in the small Chinatown there.

MacWorld 2007 keynote

Peacock near The Trout

Sure Apple gets millions worth of free advertising by releasing its products in their glitzy, spectacular way. At the same time, it is hard for a geeky Mac fan not to comment.

Everyone expected Apple to announce the iPhone at Macworld, though there does seem to be more to this device than most people expected. Everyone expected it to be an iPod and a phone, in this case it has 8GB of storage, and most expected it to be widescreen. The two megapixel camera is probably pretty poor – as telephone cameras universally are – but it could be useful regardless. The biggest surprise is that the thing runs OS X, rather than the proprietary and limited systems generally associated with smartphone and Blackberry type devices. Combined with the embedded sensors (proximity, ambient light, and an accelerometer), I imagine people are going to come up with some pretty amazing hacks for these devices.

The iPhone is a quad-band GSM + EDGE phone with WiFi and Bluetooth 2.0. A lot of people probably expected it to be 3G, but this is a better move for Apple. 3G has pretty much been a disaster for everyone who bet on it. The fact that it seems capable of talking to WiFi networks is also a big plus, especially if it can be used to do VoIP in an elegant way. The fact that it does not is unsurprising, but also a letdown. I am personally looking forward to the days when mobile phones automatically form mesh networks to pass traffic between themselves. That would circumvent the need for network infrastructure for calls within densely populated places and really change the business circumstances in which cellular service providers found themselves.

The mundane issues are more what concerns me: it looks like the starting price is US$499 for a 4GB model and US$599 for the 8GB and they will start shipping in June. Those prices are based on signing up for a two year phone contract, also. There’s no way it makes sense to buy the release version, as there are usually a couple of serious flaws that get sorted out in the next version. (Not that I will be spending $600 on such a device any time in the foreseeable future.) The battery life is supposedly sufficient for five hours of talk time and sixteen hours of audio listening. If true, that is better than my iPod Shuffle, and enormously better than my old 20GB 4th generation iPod.

Like a lot of people, I am curious about whether this device will stand up to everyday abrasion better than the iPod Nanos do. There’s also no way I would even consider buying this platform before Skype or something similar can be run on it.

Citable citation

Tree and blue sky

My congratulations go out to my friend Lindi Cassel: the first person who I know personally (as in ‘used to make stick figures out of kneadable eraser while in biology class with’) to get cited on Google Scholar:

Cassel, Lindi and Peter Suedfeld. “Salutogenesis and autobiographical disclosure among Holocaust survivors.” The Journal of Positive Psychology. Volume 1, Number 4 / October 2006. p.212-225.

While the subject matter is certainly sobering, the publication is extremely impressive, like so much else about Lindi. Bravo.

GMail security hole

Path to Marston

As people who read techie news pages like Engadget and Slashdot already know, a somewhat serious security flaw in GMail has recently been uncovered. Specifically, when you are logged into GMail in one browser window or tab, any other site you visit can grab your entire contact list. Whether that is a serious leak or not is a matter of perspective. Certainly, it exposes all of your friends of even more spam than they already receive.

Read the following carefully before you click anything. If you want to see the script that grabs contact lists at work, follow this link. Engadget says it’s “non-malicious,” but the risk is yours. The bug arises from the way in which GMail stores your contacts as a JavaScript file that can be requested by other websites. Google claims they have fixed the bug but, as the link above will prove, they have not.

Plausible attacks

A site that wanted to be really sneaky could exploit this information in many ways. At the very least, it could be used to very easily identify many of the people who are visiting. Knowing someone’s contact list might help in the launching of phishing attacks. It could, for example, make it easier to work out what company someone works for. You could then find out who does their information technology and send spoofed emails that seem to come from the IT department, asking for passwords or other sensitive information.

If it is a site that contains content that many people would not want others to know that they view, it could grab the email addresses for people with the same last name as you and threaten to send them information on your surfing history. A less complicated ploy would be to use emails that seem to come from people who you know to get through spam filters. Because of email spoofing, it is very easy to make messages seem to be coming from someone else.

Implications

As someone with 1037 MB of data in my main GMail account – including 14,410 emails and more than 1500 instant message conversations – I am naturally very concerned about GMail security. There is tons of stuff in there that I would be profoundly opposed to seeing on a public search engine, as has already happened in at least one case with private GMail data.

Contrary to their own assertions, Google had analysed and indexed all e-mails processed through their mail service. Due to a mistake made by an administrator, a database of the highly secret project was mirrored onto the external index servers, and as a result, the private mails of thousands of GMail users could be accessed via the search front-end for at least one hour.

Source

Clearly, it would be preferable if GMail started using durable encryption on their archived messages. This would both protect the messages from hostile outsiders and keep Google from doing anything undesirable with them. Even a passphrase based symmetric-key encryption system (perhaps based on AES) would be an improvement. I bet all the students at Arizona State University, which had turned to GMail to provide all their email services would feel likewise, if they knew.

[Update: 8:30pm] This article by Brad Templeton, the Chairman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, makes some good general points about GMail and privacy.

[Update: 11:00pm] According to Engadget, this hole has been fixed. It’s good that it was dealt with so quickly, but there are still reasons to be concerned about GMail security in general.

[Update: 2 January 2007] The mainstream media has caught up with the story. CBC News: Teen exposes Google security flaw.

[Update: 18 July 2008] GMail just added a very useful ‘Activity on this account’ feature. It tells you (a) whether any other computers are logged into account and (b) when and where the last five logins took place from. This is excellent.