FreeBSD 8.1

This sounds interesting...
.

This could be important because FreeBSD has ZFS and OpenSolaris' future is somewhat cloudy after the Oracle takeover of Sun.

Perform OCR on PDF

This sounds interesting...
.

This sounds like a good addition to my fax to email utility.

More evidence that a smart grid is essential

We've already seen that power transmissions between states have low redundancy. Regional power transfers come down to a few critical links which can reach capacity, and can be knocked out when they are needed most. Does Enron and the 2001 California blackouts ring a bell here? Enron's blatant market manipulation took advantage of "deregulation" and a hot spring/summer along the Pacific coast to maximize their bottom line, but at the expense of power consumers. Add forest fires, people's willingness to pay for a utility/necessity and you have a "perfect storm" to gouge consumers to the hilt. Enron effectively set the cost per kilowatt on a daily basis. This worked (for a while) to pad Enron's bottom line, but eventually, the bottom fell out and along with the collapse, the truth came out: the blackouts had been artificially created, essentially a giant hoax perpetrated on the nation.

Almost ten years later, that same power grid is tied together in the same way. It is not up to transmitting power from decentralized sources from green energy. It's ironic that wind/solar farms have to be shutdown when demand is highest because there is insufficient power transmission capacity.

Here is Slashdot's headline.

p.s. This was an interesting broadcast about the aging power grid. Make sure to check the interactive graphic on that page. Note: this was a followup to story which appeared in National Geographic, here.

It's always interesting to watch movies from earlier eras, just to see how well they hold up over time if nothing else. We just watched the Elia Kazan's 1961 movie Splendor in the Grass. The movie is set in time at the height of the first stock market bubble/bust cycle, 1928-1929. The preacher warns early on,

Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust does corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:

The audience knows that trouble is ahead for companies that get caught up in the bubble, like "Stamper Oil." Money buys friends and influence- as long as you have it. What looks like a sure thing today, is wiped out tomorrow. It's a good backdrop for the main story about high school sweethearts. The audience knows that 1929 is coming for the Stamper fortune, but will it be the same fate for the young lovers? This film portrays the pressures of this time of life. Their personal choices set the direction for the rest of their lives.

The film is notable because of the personal choices that director Elia Kazan made in his own life. His choice was to name-names during the red scare. That allowed him to continue working in Hollywood, and free to work with "A-list" talent. The flip side choice, to remain silent or to not appear, was not rewarded. A lot of great actors and directors, such as Jules Dassin faced the blacklist and exile. Kazan's choice really casts a pall over his entire body of work. It is especially noticable with the anti-union sentiments that are part of On the Waterfront. That picture suffers a lot more than Splendor in the Grass. Here, the great performances, especially from Natalie Wood, will stand the test of time. It is truly great and overcomes the negative points assigned to Kazan.

.
I don't know how Natalie Wood did not win the best actress oscar for that year. Perhaps, there was a split vote between her and Audrey Hepburn; or perhaps, the audience wasn't ready for a non-happily ever after resolution. Still, this may be the best female performance of the entire 1960's decade. Any other nominations?

Coming Soon: Last Patches for Windows 2000 and XP SP2

Tomorrow marks the effective "end of life" for Microsoft Windows 2000 and XP SP2. I hope you're ready for it. Also, the same fate will come to XP in toto in just four years (SP3 is its final incarnation). This is notable because Windows 2000 is often used at banks and other institutions. Hopefully, they've been on a fast track program to upgrade. However, that isn't all that likely in this economy and state of computer awareness in management. The truth is XP is so entrenched in business, government, and education, it will require major upgrade programs to be ready to pull the plug by 2014. Perhaps the feds can leverage extra support time for XP, maybe by playing a "monopoly" card. It seems fair, considering that Microsoft has enjoyed a monopoly in personal computer operating systems for the last 25 years. Perhaps, W2k's expiration will cause some alarm bells to start ringing. In the age of budget cuts, schools and government especially should look at ways to get off the monopolist's software, especially when a free alternative exists.

By the way, XP's approximate ten year lifespan is short by other software standards. The feds should have argued for twenty years of support in the antitrust case. Instead, they threw in the towel. I have agured that XP only gained enough maturity for general use at the service pack three level. That gives, in reality, about 7 years of useful life. (Of course, that depends a lot on your definition of the word "useful.")

A lot of users are still on W2k or XP because they wanted to avoid the upgrade treadmill, or because Vista had some big issues with compatibility and stability. It offered a new paint job and some new DRM restrictions - par for the course. It also moved the "furniture" around, as Microsoft is fond of doing. It certainly looks like a lot of fun to shuffle the deck chairs about! Of course, mac's got a lot of milage out of the vista upgrade fiasco. Here is the ad showing the "popularity" of downgrading to XP.

Here is slashdot's headline.

Photo Kiosks Spreads Viruses

It seems the proverbial mother's warning about "catching something" at a public restroom isn't that far off. Just substitute "photo kiosk" for "public restroom" and your computer has potentially caught a nasty Windows virus.

Here is Slashdot's
headline.

The summary raises some interesting questions, especially considering the quantity, ubiquity, and potential damage from Windows viruses. It seems reasonable to assume some protection is in place, especially when the sky is the limit (complete rootkit infection) when dealing with the Windows platform. A rootkit infection is within the realm of possibilities because these devices can be used to boot the system- a simple replay of the floppy disc attack of old. Unfortunately, today's viruses aren't as benign as the music bug virus of old.

Employees Must Wash Hands Before Returning to Work
It is just astounding to me that people expect to be able to "trust" their computers, but don't practice "safe computing." In my opinion, safe computing may require abandoning the Windows platform entirely.