957 lines
49 KiB
Plaintext
957 lines
49 KiB
Plaintext
Computer underground Digest Wed July 28, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 68
|
|
ISSN 1004-042X
|
|
|
|
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
|
|
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
|
|
Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish
|
|
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
|
|
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
|
|
Ian Dickinson
|
|
Copper Ionizer: Ephram Shrustleau
|
|
|
|
CONTENTS, #6.68 (Wed, July 28, 1994)
|
|
|
|
File 1--Preliminary HOPE (Conference) Panels
|
|
File 2--Re: Sysop Liability for Copyright
|
|
File 3--Re: Response to - Sysop Liability for Copyright (CuD 6.62)
|
|
File 4--Re CuD 6.66--Roger Clarke on authoritarian IT
|
|
File 5--Re: CuD 6.62--Response to Wade Riddick Open Letter
|
|
File 6--Reply to DNA debate
|
|
|
|
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
|
|
available at no cost electronically.
|
|
|
|
CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest
|
|
|
|
Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name
|
|
Send it to LISTSERV@UIUCVMD.BITNET or LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU
|
|
The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302)
|
|
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
|
|
60115, USA.
|
|
|
|
Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
|
|
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
|
|
LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
|
|
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
|
|
the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
|
|
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
|
|
on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet);
|
|
and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441.
|
|
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
|
|
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.
|
|
|
|
EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;
|
|
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493
|
|
|
|
UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/
|
|
ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD
|
|
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
|
|
world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
uceng.uc.edu in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland)
|
|
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
|
|
|
|
JAPAN: ftp.glocom.ac.jp /mirror/ftp.eff.org/
|
|
|
|
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
|
|
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
|
|
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
|
|
as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
|
|
they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
|
|
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
|
|
specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
|
|
relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
|
|
preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
|
|
unless absolutely necessary.
|
|
|
|
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
|
|
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
|
|
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
|
|
violate copyright protections.
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 02:00:12 -0700
|
|
From: Emmanuel Goldstein <emmanuel@WELL.SF.CA.US>
|
|
Subject: Preliminary HOPE (Conference) Panels
|
|
|
|
Here is the first draft of the topics to be covered on the HOPE
|
|
panels. This is a tentative list - more topics will be added and
|
|
others will be modified. The actual times of the panels will be
|
|
released at the conference.
|
|
+=======================================
|
|
Hackers On Planet Earth
|
|
Saturday, August 13th, 12 noon
|
|
to Sunday, August 14th, 11:59 pm
|
|
Hotel Pennsylvania, New York City, 18th Floor
|
|
(People helping to set up the ethernet can come by Friday night.)
|
|
|
|
For full registration info, call (516) 751-2600 or
|
|
email/finger info@hope.net
|
|
=======================================================
|
|
NETWORK MUSIC PROVIDED IN PART BY SUB-POP
|
|
|
|
OPENING ADDRESS WELCOMING HACKERS TO NEW YORK WILL BE GIVEN BY
|
|
EX-CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY EMPLOYEE ROBERT STEELE.
|
|
|
|
=================== TENTATIVE TOPICS ===================
|
|
|
|
FUN WITH PAGERS
|
|
|
|
Have you ever had the opportunity to monitor the pager of your
|
|
choice, seeing each and every page as it comes over, alphanumeric
|
|
included? You will. The entire city of New York is wide open and
|
|
we'll demonstrate exactly how it's done. More pager tricks and
|
|
little-known facts will be presented.
|
|
Hosted by Thomas Icom
|
|
===============
|
|
CELLULAR
|
|
|
|
OK, how is it done, really? We've all heard about cellular phone
|
|
cloning but how many of us have had the guts to actually do it
|
|
ourselves? Actually, probably quite a few because it's relatively
|
|
easy. But, as with any technological trick, there is a multitude
|
|
of misinformation being handed out. That won't happen here as the
|
|
true experts will be on hand to demonstrate cloning and answer
|
|
questions. We will show how cloning is not just for criminals and
|
|
how you can clone a phone on your own PC! Cellular software to do
|
|
this will be made available for free! You will also see first
|
|
hand the risks of using a cellular phone.
|
|
Hosted by Bernie S. and Count Zero
|
|
===============
|
|
THE N.Y.C. METROCARD
|
|
|
|
New York City has just introduced a brand new farecard system for
|
|
mass transit, one unlike any other in the United States. We have
|
|
been gathering data on this system for some time now and hackers
|
|
all over the world are trying to figure out ways of cracking it.
|
|
Unlike most other mass transit card systems, this one uses master
|
|
databases. We will read the cards, duplicate them, and make every
|
|
attempt to defeat the system. By the end of HOPE, we will have
|
|
either cracked it or deemed it secure. Your participation is
|
|
encouraged. We expect to have representatives of the Metropolitan
|
|
Transit Authority on hand to answer questions and keep a nervous
|
|
eye on us.
|
|
===============
|
|
CHAOS COMPUTER CLUB
|
|
|
|
For many years now, Germany's Chaos Computer Club has been making
|
|
headlines all over the world for all kinds of mischief. But, as
|
|
with all things, there is much much more to the story. For the
|
|
first time ever, the CCC will be in this country to answer
|
|
questions and share information of all sorts.
|
|
===============
|
|
HACK-TIC
|
|
|
|
Although it's almost entirely in Dutch, Hack-Tic and the many
|
|
people involved in its production have been the inspiration for
|
|
hackers all over the planet. If HOPE is half as successful as the
|
|
two hacker congresses Hack-Tic has hosted (Galactic Hacker Party
|
|
of 1989 and Hacking at the End of the Universe of 1993), it will
|
|
be an incredible event. Because of the far more relaxed
|
|
atmosphere in Holland, hackers there are able to accomplish much
|
|
more without all of the paranoia that is so abundant here. We
|
|
will hear their story and find out about all of the technological
|
|
projects they're involved in.
|
|
===============
|
|
SOCIAL ENGINEERING
|
|
|
|
By far one of the most effective ways of getting information is
|
|
the art of social engineering. You will see some live social
|
|
engineering, get tips on what not to do, hear some great
|
|
legendary tales from the masters, and listen to social
|
|
engineering tapes of the past. You are welcome to participate in
|
|
our social engineering contest - we give you an operator and you
|
|
go as far as you can.
|
|
===============
|
|
LINUX
|
|
|
|
Linux is the Freely Distributable Unix clone available by ftp
|
|
from many sites on the Internet. It is a remarkably complete and
|
|
stable OS for intel-based PC's that is a direct result of the
|
|
existence of the Internet, which allowed for the cooperative
|
|
development team of volunteers to communicate in real time during
|
|
their development of their respective parts of the project. Linux
|
|
continues to enjoy rapid development and is already a viable and
|
|
popular alternative to commercial Unix OS's. It is being
|
|
installed in basements and at commercial, academic, and
|
|
governmental organizations around the world. Michael Johnston,
|
|
developer of the new Slackware Professional Linux package (in
|
|
partnership with Patrick Volkerding, author of the Slackware
|
|
distribution of Linux on the net), will speak on the differences
|
|
between the different Linux distributions available "for free" by
|
|
ftp on the Internet, and in particular the changes in Slackware
|
|
(the most popular Linux distribution on the net) between versions
|
|
1.2 and the new 2.0.
|
|
===============
|
|
UPDATE ON ITALIAN HACKER CRACKDOWN
|
|
|
|
Recently, one of the largest computer raids in history took place
|
|
in Italy, focusing its attention on Fidonet. The investigation
|
|
and the overall oppressive atmosphere are continuing. An update
|
|
from an eyewitness.
|
|
===============
|
|
HOW DO HACKERS HANDLE MALICIOUS USERS?
|
|
|
|
With so many new people being drawn to the net every day, the
|
|
criminal element is bound to become more visible. This means
|
|
users who destroy files, wipe entire systems, harrass users, and
|
|
cause intentional pandemonium. Perhaps the worst part of this is
|
|
that the media considers such deliberate malice to be another
|
|
part of hacking. How do hackers deal with such users and the
|
|
misperceptions of the hacker world that are created? Is it proper
|
|
for hackers to go to the authorities on such occasions or will
|
|
that ultimately backfire? You'll hear stories, experiences,
|
|
suggestions, arguments, etc. from experts and non-experts alike.
|
|
===============
|
|
BOXING
|
|
|
|
Contrary to popular belief, boxing is not dead. As you will see,
|
|
there are so many possibilities. We will have some top phone
|
|
phreaks on hand to show you what works, what doesn't, what used
|
|
to work, what never did, and what probably might. American boxing
|
|
is only one small part of the entire global picture. In this
|
|
panel, we guarantee all questions will have answers. Also
|
|
included: An overview of current inband systems like R1, R2, and
|
|
C5. The pains of ANI and the ease with which it can be spoofed.
|
|
Cellular and cordless tricks.
|
|
Hosted by Billsf and Kevin Crow.
|
|
===============
|
|
AUTHORS
|
|
|
|
Steven Levy (Hackers), Winn Schwartau (Terminal Compromise),
|
|
Paul Tough (Harpers, Esquire), Paul Bergsman (Control The World
|
|
With Your Computer), Julian Dibbel (Village Voice, Spin).
|
|
===============
|
|
WEARABLE COMPUTERS AND CHORDIC INPUT
|
|
|
|
Doug Platt of Select Tech will be walking around the HOPE
|
|
conference wearing and demonstrating a computer of his own design
|
|
that will be connected live to the Internet via wireless
|
|
technology. Doug will be reporting live on the HOPE conference
|
|
via the Internet as he walks around.
|
|
===============
|
|
HISTORY OF 2600
|
|
|
|
How did it all start? How did it almost never happen at all? Are
|
|
our phones tapped? What's the craziest letter we ever got? Who
|
|
are the people behind the names? How many lawsuits have we been
|
|
threatened with? What do the covers mean? Where is it all
|
|
leading? Get the picture?
|
|
===============
|
|
FULL DISCLOSURE - LIVE SHORTWAVE BROADCAST FROM HOPE
|
|
|
|
Learn all about Full Disclosure, a magazine many consider to be
|
|
as dangerous as 2600! Free copies will be available. On Sunday
|
|
at 8 pm a live call-in from HOPE to "Full Disclosure Live" will
|
|
take place on international shortwave on WWCR at 5810 KHz
|
|
shortwave.
|
|
===============
|
|
LEGAL ISSUES
|
|
|
|
Dave Banisar of the newly formed Washington DC based Electronic
|
|
Privacy Information Center (EPIC) will fill us in on the latest
|
|
laws, restrictions, and risks facing us all. There will also be
|
|
updates on the 2600 Pentagon City Mall incident and tips on how
|
|
to make the Freedom Of Information Act work for you. Come to this
|
|
panel with any questions or comments about the ACLU, EFF, CPSR,
|
|
etc.
|
|
===============
|
|
WHAT IS THIS CRYPTOGRAPHY STUFF AND WHY SHOULD I CARE?
|
|
|
|
There have been quite a few articles in the national media
|
|
recently about cryptography and privacy. Bob Stratton will
|
|
attempt to provide an introduction to the terms and technology,
|
|
how it affects the average citizen, and insights into the public
|
|
policy debate currently raging in Washington and around the
|
|
world. There will be a special emphasis on the relationship of
|
|
cryptographic technology and emerging personal communications
|
|
tools.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 94 20:36:25
|
|
From: "Carolina, Robert" <Robert.Carolina@CCHANCE.CO.UK>
|
|
Subject: Re: Sysop Liability for Copyright
|
|
|
|
>From my reading of the posts on this subject, it appears to me
|
|
that there is a pretty serious misunderstanding of a critical
|
|
aspect of the Frena case. To put the matter in context, the
|
|
original poster noted that the court imposed liability regardless
|
|
of the sysop's knowledge of what users were doing on his board.
|
|
David Batterson responded: "Nonsense. Frena knew exactly what his
|
|
users were doing, and so did the court." Later Mr Batterson
|
|
concludes, "... courts CAN recognize copyright infringement when
|
|
they see it. And so can I, without being a lawyer." Unfortunately,
|
|
the Frena decision goes much further than this fairly
|
|
straightforward conclusion.
|
|
|
|
Because of the procedural posture of the case (motion for summary
|
|
judgment), the judge was limited in terms of what he could or
|
|
could not decide. There was not much evidence placed before the
|
|
court other than the admissions of both parties about the nature
|
|
of the files. Thus the judge was faced with a simple question: are
|
|
there any facts in dispute which would merit a trial.
|
|
|
|
Mr Frena clearly was disputing whether or not he had prior
|
|
knowledge that the copyright files were on his system. By ruling
|
|
against Frena, the judge was saying that this disputed fact could
|
|
not influence the outcome of the case. To put it a little
|
|
differently, the judge was saying: "Even if I believe your story,
|
|
it just doesn't matter -- you are still going to be guilty of
|
|
infringement because ignorance of the files' presence on your
|
|
board is not an excuse." (Yes, I know that the case does not
|
|
appear to say this, but I assure you that this is the message the
|
|
court sent to every US lawyer reading the decision. It is also the
|
|
message that we have to pass on to our clients when they ask us
|
|
"what have the courts said about this.")
|
|
|
|
Now this kind of a ruling is much more serious than if the judge
|
|
had merely said, "I don't believe your story and I am finding you
|
|
liable." Unfortunately, the judge was not willing to wait for a
|
|
full trial to make this kind of a ruling. Why? There are a few
|
|
possibilities which are not mutually exclusive. First, he could
|
|
genuinely believe that a sysop with an "open posting" policy
|
|
should be strictly liable for the infringing activities of his
|
|
subscribers. (Mr Batterson appears to agree with this to some
|
|
extent.)
|
|
|
|
Secondly, he could have been concerned about wasting valuable
|
|
court time on what he viewed as a "clearly loser" case. This
|
|
second possibility disturbs me somewhat. If the judge was taking
|
|
this kind of "shortcut", then he denied Mr Frena his day in court.
|
|
More importantly, Mr Frena probably would have had the right to
|
|
make his "I didn't know about it" argument to a jury rather than
|
|
to the judge. By ruling that the law worked against Frena
|
|
regardless of the facts in dispute, the judge took the liability
|
|
phase of the case away from any possible jury consideration.
|
|
|
|
In short, the judge may have decided more than he needed to in
|
|
order to dispose of this case quickly and cleanly. In my opinion
|
|
he set a bad precedent in the process. My suspicion is that Mr
|
|
Frena will probably settle rather than undertake the time and
|
|
considerable expense of an appeal. The rest of us will have to
|
|
wait for the outcome of the pending CompuServe audio file
|
|
litigation in New York before a "major" federal court gives an
|
|
answer to this question.
|
|
|
|
I must admit that I was intrigued by the force of Mr Batterson's
|
|
rejoinder on the issue of what a "reasonable sysop" should do. It
|
|
seems to me that he would wish all publicly accessible file
|
|
servers to be subject to "pre-posting" editorial control. It could
|
|
be that he will be proved right in the long run, but I hope not.
|
|
(Before people shout that this would not be fair, remember that
|
|
owners and occupiers of real property face a similar standard of
|
|
liability as regards personal injury suffered by third parties.)
|
|
|
|
I should stress that the opinions expressed above are mine alone,
|
|
and not necessarily those of Clifford Chance. For those of you who
|
|
have not yet met me, I am a US lawyer working with the Computer &
|
|
Communications practice group of a major international law
|
|
practice in London. The points above will be incorporated into a
|
|
longer article on the subject of "transmission liability" which I
|
|
hope to publish this fall. I will send a pointer to the article as
|
|
and when it is printed.
|
|
|
|
Best regards,
|
|
|
|
/s/Rob Carolina
|
|
----
|
|
Robert A. Carolina Telephone: (071) 600 1000
|
|
Clifford Chance Intl: +44 71 600 1000
|
|
200 Aldersgate Street Fax: +44 71 600 5555
|
|
London EC1A 4JJ Internet: Robert.Carolina@cchance.co.uk
|
|
United Kingdom X.400: on request
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 1994 14:39:48 +1000 (EST)
|
|
From: Mr Rhys Weatherley <rhys@FIT.QUT.EDU.AU>
|
|
Subject: Re: Response to - Sysop Liability for Copyright (CuD 6.62)
|
|
|
|
In CuD 6.64, dbatterson@ATTMAIL.COM(David Batterson ) writes:
|
|
|
|
>If you allow immediately downloads, you are providing tacit approval
|
|
>for users to upload commercial software programs, which could then be
|
|
>available for immediate download.
|
|
|
|
I flipping well hope this isn't the default "approval test"! There
|
|
are millions of machines across the globe that currently allow users
|
|
to upload files for immediate download with no review by the sysop at
|
|
all. It's called "USENET". Virtually anyone at any time can post
|
|
anything anywhere and it is immediately available for viewing (and
|
|
download with appropriate software) on millions of machines, not to
|
|
mention the original machine it was posted on. Not just messages like
|
|
this one, but copyrighted files too. From a theoretical standpoint,
|
|
there is no observable difference between what happens in a BBS file
|
|
area and a newsgroup. The software paraphenalia might be slightly
|
|
different, but the overall effect is the same.
|
|
|
|
Hands up all those who haven't seen at least one copyrighted file or
|
|
newspaper article posted without permission on USENET in the last
|
|
month. No one? Does us knowing that this happens somehow make us
|
|
responsible and we should all be carted off to jail for copyright
|
|
infringement?
|
|
|
|
This is the real danger of making sysops responsible by default.
|
|
Applied to USENET sites, if I don't watch my users like a hawk I am
|
|
responsible when they step out of line behind my back (and I'm also
|
|
responsible if I miss something).
|
|
|
|
Applied even further, I would be responsible for anything that comes
|
|
in over my news feed if I don't scan it before making it available.
|
|
You are welcome to volunteer to scan the thousands of messages per day
|
|
that hit my system David, but I've got better things to do with my
|
|
time. I'll take action if I'm notified of a problem, but I can't be
|
|
expected to prevent the problems from occurring in the first place
|
|
without censoring my users (and losing the respect of my users in the
|
|
process).
|
|
|
|
Maybe Frena is guilty of promoting copyright theft. I'm not in a
|
|
position to judge. But I believe that more evidence is needed than
|
|
"since there is an open place there he must be guilty of looking the
|
|
other way". The test for sysop liability needs to have a lot more
|
|
preconditions added before it really is used against someone unfairly.
|
|
If the EFF, CPRS, ACLU, etc, can succeed in getting those
|
|
preconditions added, the world will be a safer place for all of us.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 94 01:33 EST
|
|
From: "Charles E. Petras" <0003225457@MCIMAIL.COM>
|
|
Subject: Re CuD 6.66--Roger Clarke on authoritarian IT
|
|
|
|
I thought the following, which I sent to the paper's author (who is in
|
|
Australia), might clarify what "authoritarian" stuff we should be talking
|
|
about.
|
|
|
|
From--Charles E. Petras, MCI Id--322-5457
|
|
To--Roger Clarke (author of original paper)
|
|
|
|
I received a copy of your paper as part of the RISKS e-digest on the
|
|
internet, and I'd like to compliment you on a very insightful presentation
|
|
of the topic.
|
|
|
|
But, and there is always a but, I feel the need to challenge the following
|
|
statement that you made:
|
|
|
|
"...the openness and freedom which are supposed to be
|
|
the hallmarks of democratic government."
|
|
|
|
Specifically I offer the following definitions from the 1928 edition of the
|
|
American Military Training Manual:
|
|
|
|
DEMOCRACY, at TM 200025, 118120: _A government of the masses._ Authority
|
|
derived through mass meeting or any other form of direct expression.
|
|
_Results in a mobocracy._ Attitude toward property is communistic, negating
|
|
property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall
|
|
regulate whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion,
|
|
prejudice and impulse without restraint or regard to consequences. _Results
|
|
in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy._
|
|
|
|
REPUBLIC, at TM 200025, 120121: Authority is derived through the election
|
|
of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward property
|
|
is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic
|
|
procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord
|
|
with fixed principals and established evidence, with a strict regard to
|
|
consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be
|
|
brought within its compass. _Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny
|
|
or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice,
|
|
contentment and progress._
|
|
|
|
As a point of information, I live in the United States of America. Some
|
|
time ago our republican form of government was subverted into a democracy
|
|
called the 'United States.' This process was started by our Civil War
|
|
(1860's) which resulted in a strengthing of the central (federal)
|
|
governemnt, the imposition of the so-called 14th Amendment to our
|
|
Constitution which created a federal citizen ('United States citizen') who
|
|
is in reality a subject (as opposed to a Common Law Citizen who is the
|
|
sovereign person talked about in our Declaration of Independence that
|
|
creates governments, specifically the fifty republics that banded together
|
|
to form the 'united States of America').
|
|
|
|
The capstone to this process was the so-called 17th Amendment to our
|
|
Constitution which caused (on the federal level) the upper house of the
|
|
government, the Senate, to be elected by 'the people' as opposed to being
|
|
appointed by the various state legislatures. This gave the moochers and
|
|
looters control of the federal government, we went from a country of law, to
|
|
a country of public policy. With the ensuing loss of private property
|
|
rights and individual freedoms that is evident today. A democracy that has
|
|
appointed itself the worlds policeman (and even toppled your [Australia's]
|
|
government on occasions when it didn't tow-the-line).
|
|
|
|
Hopefully this will clear up any illusions that there is something desirably
|
|
about having a democratic government.
|
|
|
|
As to the "emergent information societies", well I hope you might reconsider
|
|
your conclusion.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 1994 10:56:27 -0500
|
|
From: Jason Zions <jazz@HAL.COM>
|
|
Subject: Re: CuD 6.62--Response to Wade Riddick Open Letter
|
|
|
|
In his response to the Wade Riddick letter, David Moore extracts two quotes
|
|
without much comment, to wit:
|
|
|
|
QUOTE: -------------
|
|
Government, though, has several options for the role it can play in
|
|
this process: (1) the Commerce Department, perhaps with some
|
|
authorizing legislation, could call industry heads together and order
|
|
them to set a common object code standard; (2) Commerce could
|
|
acceptbids from various companies and groups for such a standard; or
|
|
(3)finally, the federal government could itself craft a standard with
|
|
thehelp of qualified but disinterested engineers, and then try to
|
|
forceit upon the industry through the use of government procurement
|
|
rules,control over the flow of research and development money or
|
|
othereconomic levers.
|
|
-------------
|
|
QUOTE: -------------
|
|
A serious effort should also be made to reach a consensus
|
|
with other industrialized nations, for computers are
|
|
globally interconnected to a degree that no other mass
|
|
consumer product has been.
|
|
-------------
|
|
|
|
The quotes indicate that Wade has little understanding of the way
|
|
standards are developed in the US. US national standards are voluntary
|
|
in nature; that is, people volunteer to write them and volunteer to
|
|
comply with them. Sure, sometimes the federal government uses a big
|
|
stick to beat vendors into compliance ("Comply with FIPS-151 or we
|
|
won't buy your computer"), but this stick is different only in dollar
|
|
volume from that wielded by any other purchaser.
|
|
|
|
Let's examine Wade's three alternatives. Option 1: order industry to
|
|
set a common object code standard. Never happen; Commerce doesn't have
|
|
the authority, and I don't know that Congress has it to give to
|
|
Congress. In any event, there's the small matter of enforcement, as
|
|
well as the small matter of the billions of dollars of already
|
|
installed equipment which would be rendered obsolete overnight.
|
|
Economic damage would be large. Choice 2: accept bids for a standard.
|
|
And just how are they supposed to select one, pray tell? Would you
|
|
care to guess just how many years of court time would be consumed by
|
|
the losers? Choice 3: the fed (probably through NIST) could develop
|
|
its own standard using qualified but disinterested engineers. And
|
|
where the hell are they going to find *them*? Engineers that are
|
|
qualified to do this work are already employed and doing the work for
|
|
some vendor. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to develop a new
|
|
CPU architecture? The amount of time it takes to do the job? And
|
|
before you say "new college grads", try talking to someone who's
|
|
actually been on an architecture design team; you'll find that
|
|
significant experience is required to do the job well, and that
|
|
experience is acquired by doing it in the company of those who've done
|
|
it before.
|
|
|
|
More important, though, is the fact that there *is* an IEEE standard
|
|
computer instruction set. IEEE Std 1754-1994 is a specification of the
|
|
SPARC V8 architecture. Combined with public-domain specs for the SPARC
|
|
ABI (application binary interface), Wade has pretty much what he
|
|
wants. By the time he figures out he doesn't really want it, it may be
|
|
too late.
|
|
|
|
1754 is hardly the first standard instruction set. There will
|
|
doubtless be others, and I predict the first use of 1754 in an RFP
|
|
will generate a lawsuit tying the whole issue up in the courts for
|
|
years. I believe 1754 is not just Wrong, but is inherently Evil;
|
|
contrary to Wade, I am of the considered opinion that the instruction
|
|
set, or the binary level, is exactly the wrong place to drive a stake
|
|
into the ground.
|
|
|
|
As for the need for serious international standardization efforts,
|
|
they, too, already exist. Need I remind anyone of the most famous
|
|
computer standards to be delivered by ISO - the Open System
|
|
Interconnect standards, i.e. OSI. Sure, they were developed in an
|
|
international arena. And they're pretty lousy standards. If you think
|
|
the way we develop standards in the US is crazy, you ought to see how
|
|
they get built elsewhere. Academics, who haven't bothered to actually
|
|
implement anything, dream up these glorious pie-in-the-sky designs and
|
|
then write them into standards, leaving it up to poor benighted
|
|
engineers to figure out how to build these research castles.
|
|
|
|
David does say one thing upon which I'd like to comment:
|
|
|
|
>One more time. It's the data and the communications interface to
|
|
>this data that's important. Not the specific hardware or software
|
|
>applications.
|
|
|
|
Not all the world of computing is data-centric in the sense of
|
|
long-lived data being operated on over a period of time. Process
|
|
control applications, for example; the temperature in the reaction
|
|
vessel yesterday at 2 PM isn't terribly interesting, but the
|
|
temperature now and over the last 30 seconds is damn important.
|
|
|
|
The goal is to make anything in which the user invests significant
|
|
amounts of time and money portable to different computing platforms.
|
|
If users write programs, they should be portable to different
|
|
platforms, including different operating systems; hence standard
|
|
programming languages and OS interfaces like POSIX (IEEE 1003.1 et
|
|
seq). If users collect data, the data should be moveable; hence data
|
|
format standards like ISO 8824/8825 (ASN.1 and the associated BER). If
|
|
users buy data collection hardware, the equipment should be moveable;
|
|
hence standards like SCSI, RS-232 and RS-449, etc.
|
|
|
|
Find the right level of abstraction that maximizes the range of
|
|
choices available to the user; *that* is where to standardize. With an
|
|
instruction set or ABI standard, your apps are portable to any machine
|
|
that runs that instruction set; with a source code standard, your apps
|
|
are portable to any machine that has a compiler/runtime that can
|
|
handle the defined interface. The latter is guaranteed to be larger
|
|
than the former.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 1994 16:23:51 -0500 (CDT)
|
|
From: Wade Riddick <riddick@JEEVES.LA.UTEXAS.EDU>
|
|
Subject: Reply to DNA debate (Wayne Riddick Elaborates)
|
|
|
|
"I am the emperor and I want my noodles."
|
|
|
|
That was supposedly one of the most lucid things ever said by
|
|
the mad King of Bavaria (Frederick or Ludwig--I'm not such which,
|
|
but neither was he). I don't recall saying anything about noodles
|
|
in the reprint I recently posted to CUD, but some readers have
|
|
tried to link me with mad kings, all the same. I think that's
|
|
partly my fault. The article was originally published in a public
|
|
policy journal, with a policy crowd in mind. I also had to cope
|
|
with space limitations. Still, all-in-all I'm grateful to the LBJ
|
|
Journal for taking a risk on something usually considered far-
|
|
afield of government work and I'm grateful to the my editors there
|
|
for helping me better speak to that audience.
|
|
Because of that original audience, though, I was encouraged
|
|
to simplify the discourse and use those dastardly "buzzwords."
|
|
Such buzzwords are appropriate inasmuch as they help the general
|
|
public get some handle on complex concepts but are, obviously, out-
|
|
of-place in this forum. As to the controversies such words invoke,
|
|
I do not think in all fairness I can be blamed for debates that are
|
|
internal to an industry I have no leadership position in.
|
|
Yes, I *am* a part of that industry, although some comrades
|
|
have chosen to attack my party credentials. I don't think the
|
|
'credentials' issue is germane, but since it has bothered some
|
|
readers I'll discuss it with other miscellaneous remarks at the end
|
|
of this letter. Right now I'd like to address a few points my
|
|
colleagues have made.
|
|
|
|
In the article, sometimes the terms 'object oriented' and
|
|
'object code' are blurred together and interchanged. I got tired
|
|
of haggling with my LBJ editors, but should have taken the time to
|
|
correct this before posting it. From the feedback, though, I think
|
|
most CUD readers inferred the appropriate meaning in each context.
|
|
Dr. Jerry Leichter, though, did not like my use of the term 'object
|
|
oriented' and thought I was overly enamored with something that
|
|
was dead (this may not actually be a crime in my native Louisiana;
|
|
I'll have to check). In fact, from my reading of the recent BYTE
|
|
articles on the subject, I thought some of the basic tenants of
|
|
object orientivity were being affirmed in the market (namely in
|
|
VBLs, to use another buzzword).
|
|
BYTE's editors pointed out that the verdict would not be in
|
|
until several future products like Cairo and Pink hit the market.
|
|
Even though the jury is still out, I'm inclined to agree with the
|
|
general sentiment of Dr. Leichter's argument. I wouldn't be
|
|
dramatic and say that object orientivity is dead, but it's obviously
|
|
not taking anyone where they wanted to go. Why? Well, VBL's and
|
|
objects in general are only an adequate solution within a given
|
|
platform. The issue of cross platform code compatibility remains,
|
|
so I think object-orientivity, in its current incarnation, fails to
|
|
solve the problem it sets out for itself unless it reconceptualizes
|
|
the code in an object itself *as* an object.
|
|
|
|
I must apologize for not going into more technical detail
|
|
about my proposal. I agree with Dr. Leichter that I do not have
|
|
all of the necessary qualifications. Frankly, I don't think anyone
|
|
does for something this broad. My goal in circulating the article
|
|
was to cast light on the enormous political problem ahead and kind
|
|
of coordination that would be needed to tackle it.
|
|
Yes, microkernels are something close to what I'm after and I
|
|
do not object to them per se. I'd really like to see some standard
|
|
software plugs for the more common microkernel services. A
|
|
standard microkernel itself would be too tied to aging hardware. I
|
|
was glad to see p-code come up. I realize the issue of p-code
|
|
inefficiency still haunts the industry, but a number of these old
|
|
interpretation and recompilation schemes are coming back into vogue
|
|
with new twists that speed them up. They face substantial legal
|
|
hurdles as to the ownership of such altered programs. If an object
|
|
code standard existed, those hurdles would vanish because the
|
|
industry could release its products in object code (encrypted
|
|
perhaps) form before being bound to the processor/operating system.
|
|
Yes, I know UNIX is supposed to do something like this and I
|
|
realize some exotic applications are too novel for such
|
|
standardization, but tell me, does the bulk of an Excel spreadsheet
|
|
really do anything that is logically different on all those
|
|
platforms? Some people have suggested that the power and
|
|
flexibility to do this comes from source code and not from object
|
|
code. Why then does source code get altered quite a bit when ported
|
|
from platform to platform? Is there no way to automate and
|
|
standardize this? If not at the object code level, then between
|
|
the source and object code level?
|
|
I know you cannot standardize future technological
|
|
developments before they arrive. There is, however, a cost involved
|
|
in not standardizing what has already come to pass. I can give you a
|
|
dozen good reasons why different microprocessors have different
|
|
instructions for adding short (16bit) integers. Different
|
|
architectures have different ways of storing and adding numbers
|
|
that are optimal to the tasks they were designed to perform. I
|
|
know why compilers output different object code when their tasks
|
|
are radically novel. But as a user with an investment in software
|
|
and a programmer looking to potential new markets, I find it
|
|
indefensible that a compiler cannot put out a universal object code
|
|
instruction for adding two integers.
|
|
|
|
As to the Mac 68000 toolbox, I did not mean to suggest it is
|
|
interpreted (though parts of it actually are on a 601). I
|
|
apologize if I said as much in the article; I probably did it to
|
|
ease the mind of my journal editor. The Mac does, of course, have
|
|
a large (native) library of standard pre-defined functions with
|
|
predefined entry points. Much of the logic of this evolution *is*
|
|
pointed to in the history of the market; I agree. I simply think
|
|
the evolution is going to have a hard time coming together without
|
|
some kind of conscious coordination among the (self-interested)
|
|
firms involved.
|
|
Some of you shuddered at my solution involving the Commerce
|
|
Department. Quite frankly, I think the industry itself (through a
|
|
cartel or a monopoly) may arrive at a fair and equitable solution,
|
|
but it will take tremendous pressure to tame the profit motive. I
|
|
know this sounds disingenuous, but you can talk to my journal
|
|
editor about this. I have to confess that at this stage I don't
|
|
care one way or the other if a particular agency is involved.
|
|
(You'll note that I hedge my bets by sprinkling the three
|
|
possibilities with words like "perhaps" and "could"). I detailed a
|
|
policy solution because the article was for a novice policy
|
|
audience. Quite frankly, I think it's asking a lot to outline a
|
|
solution and paint all the numbers in in a few short pages.
|
|
I do have some idea as to how much a problem government can
|
|
be, in general, with new technology. I attended COCOM meetings in
|
|
1989 and just a few months ago they decontrolled what they were
|
|
discussing then. (I was all for dropping PC's on the Russians).
|
|
I'm aware that large government mandated efforts like ADA have
|
|
failed. It was not my intention to advocate a particular solution,
|
|
but rather to hint at the broad outline such a solution was likely
|
|
to take and the safeguards the polity should take to guard against
|
|
monopoly. To paraphrase David Moore, there is no one in authority
|
|
who knows the best way to develop anything. But there are people
|
|
who set the agendas and who control the development process. And
|
|
we have democratic control over them.
|
|
|
|
I would like to thank Jerry Leichter for bringing up the issue
|
|
of hardware compatibility. I have absolutely no desire to impose a
|
|
hardware standard. I believe I said so in the article, despite
|
|
being pushed to say something about a 64bit RISC standard by one of
|
|
the IBM engineers who proofed the article. I fully realize that
|
|
hardware standards are unwieldy in this industry. They have not
|
|
always been so in other industries (e.g., rail) and they may not
|
|
always be so in this one once it peters out (many decades from
|
|
now). I think that's why I wrote "A computer's instructions are
|
|
vastly different than the regular objects that come to mind when
|
|
standards are discussed. The instructions CPUs use are virtual;
|
|
they are not materially dependent on any particular piece of
|
|
hardware." To use more buzzwords, processing and bandwidth are
|
|
becoming cheap; that's the lesson of the fourth technological
|
|
revolution.
|
|
Nor do I propose to define a data standard for anything
|
|
other than *certain* commands. When you can move the basic
|
|
structure of a program, the data can go with it. But how easy, to
|
|
use David Moore's example, is it for Deneba to port Canvas to a new
|
|
platform? If one company comes up with a solution to this dilemma,
|
|
it will pull strings attached to the entire software industry. And
|
|
yes, I realize this leaves all sorts of data coordination problems
|
|
out there. I believe hardware and data standards are best left to
|
|
the market. That is the cheapest way to obtain the proper
|
|
information about risky unknowns.
|
|
|
|
I'm also glad Dr. Leichter brought economics into the debate.
|
|
It was another thing I didn't have the space to discuss and I was
|
|
sure my policy audience knew enough about it to get by. I have to
|
|
say though, I found it ironic that the person who "attacked" my
|
|
credentials in microcomputers proceeded to lecture me on
|
|
macroeconomics from the basis of his microeconomic business
|
|
experience.
|
|
Dr. Leichter wondered if I learned about economics from
|
|
Marxists or Catholics. I confess that I have been influenced by an
|
|
even more sinister and anarchic group: economists themselves. I
|
|
know the market clearing price is where goods are sold, but Dr.
|
|
Leichter implies this price is somehow optimally determined. So?
|
|
Optimal for whom? Even extortion is optimal if you play the game
|
|
with pure self interest.
|
|
Optimal prices are the residue of quite complex events. They
|
|
are determined in part by the availability of information (hence
|
|
the value of figuring out before everyone else which corporation
|
|
will be taken over). Evidence in the economics literature
|
|
indicates that 'optimal' behavior goes out the window when you
|
|
introduce technological change to markets. It has to do with the
|
|
inherent problems of non-linearity. Because there is no optimal
|
|
outcome, people often proceed on faith, particularly in new
|
|
technologies where the path isn't yet clear. The fanaticism of
|
|
Steve Jobs comes to mind, but so I'm not accused of being Mac-
|
|
centric, I'll also point to the drive of Bill Gates-whose actions
|
|
affect market prices even if they're not rational (a reputational
|
|
market effect) - and to Xerox's "architecture of information" - a
|
|
fine example of how too much faith and not enough works can pose a
|
|
problem.
|
|
In short, certain aspects to the game of technological change
|
|
have no core (to use the buzzwords of non-cooperative game theory).
|
|
Where there is no optimal core, the realm of politics comes into
|
|
play. I refer you to the social choice literature and specifically
|
|
to Condorcet's voting paradox. Without a core, there often isn't
|
|
any 'rational' way to solve a problem, it's not even clear what
|
|
everybody wants (however you measure it). What are you going to do
|
|
when the outcome of the game is determined by who sets the agenda?
|
|
It is refreshing to find people who still have more faith in
|
|
macroeconomics than the macroeconomists do. Haven't you heard the
|
|
old joke, "If you laid every economist around the world from end to
|
|
end, they'd still point in every direction?" This is not to attack
|
|
economics; political science is in an even worse predicament. But
|
|
these are the inherent difficulties of trying to study a vast non-
|
|
reversible, non-linear systems. You can't roll back history and
|
|
experiment with variables. Hence, there is every room for
|
|
irrationality and emotion in certain economic circumstances.
|
|
Ignoring emotion doesn't help us understand it or the roll it plays
|
|
in politics.
|
|
Because of this non-linearity problem, I cannot roll back
|
|
history to prove absolutely that we've suffered inefficiency loss
|
|
in the computer industry. Perhaps when my dissertation is
|
|
completed, I will have mustered enough statistical evidence to
|
|
indicate that this is a likely possibility, but that's a few years
|
|
off. I simply point to the fact that designing for hardware
|
|
independence is a hot topic and a lot of money is going into it.
|
|
Perhaps we would not have saved much money if we had made the
|
|
investment to solve this problem at a time when the technology was
|
|
less widely spread, but today's corporations are making heavy
|
|
investments to solve the problem. They must think it will make or
|
|
save them money in the long run.
|
|
|
|
I would like to thank Rainer Brockerhoff of Brazil for
|
|
bringing up international aspects of the general standards problem.
|
|
It was beyond the scope of my article, but I do think international
|
|
technical standards are incredibly important and that the U.S.
|
|
needs to get on the ball to make sure mature technologies are well-
|
|
coordinated and new technologies are not strangled. And if I see
|
|
one 'non-governmental' factor compelling the American software
|
|
industry to cooperate, it's international competition.
|
|
|
|
After reading the responses, I feel for some reason compelled
|
|
to state my ideological inclination on certain issues. I have not
|
|
bought a Power Mac. Having taken a vow of poverty upon entering
|
|
graduate school, I own a meager Centris 650 (only 25MHz at that).
|
|
I do intend to upgrade. I do not like Apple's Newton in its
|
|
current incarnation. I believe it will be a success if it gets
|
|
cellular and fax capabilities and sells for around $500. Whoever
|
|
suggested giving one to every family must be confusing it with
|
|
Fannie Mae (an understandable mistake).
|
|
|
|
There was a short biography in my original CUD posting because
|
|
it was a required part for the original policy journal article. I
|
|
hope it did not mislead anyone about the nature of my credentials
|
|
or sound arrogant or facetious. It was pro forma and the policy
|
|
journal's audience could care less about my geek credentials, but I
|
|
see the error of making the same assumption here. I find the
|
|
concern that I have not received the proper education touching, but
|
|
let me put those fears to rest.
|
|
My first computer class was in Fortran IV in the summer of
|
|
1980. I was eleven. Despite that setback, I took BASIC classes
|
|
the next school year. Those were my last computer related classes
|
|
(not counting the mandatory half-credit of high school computer
|
|
literacy). I bought an Apple ][e, taught myself Applesoft BASIC
|
|
and 6502 machine language (and later 65816 on the ][gs). Among
|
|
other things, I redesigned part of the BASIC interpreter using bank
|
|
switched memory (an idea later commercialized by someone else in
|
|
Beagle BASIC, but I don't guess experimenting with dual stack
|
|
machines is enough to qualify me as a 'systems programmer'). At one
|
|
point I wrote a real-time data collection program in 6502 and
|
|
6522VIA assembly. I generally did not muck around with modems or
|
|
disk drive code, fearing my computer would catch a disease or the
|
|
FBI.
|
|
Not knowing I could go nowhere with an 8th grade computer
|
|
education, I took a job with LSU when I graduated high school
|
|
writing testing and scheduling software on an MS-DOS machine (a
|
|
platform I still prefer for sheer ease of programming) in BASIC and
|
|
Pascal. While in college, I spent a summer at the Democratic
|
|
Senatorial Campaign Committee designing their contributor and media
|
|
tracking databases in Clipper. On the side I wrote screen savers
|
|
and fractal generators (who didn't?) for the Mac in Pascal. After
|
|
getting my B.A., I spent a semester at the University of Sydney
|
|
where I designed motion after effect software for psychological
|
|
experiments. I currently have two commercial Mac screen savers on
|
|
the market - alas, not through a company I started but at least I
|
|
do own all my copyrights.
|
|
I am also working on a freeware interactive statistical
|
|
package for the Mac entitled "Pixelated Entropy." I'll say
|
|
something about it since I will at some point make it generally
|
|
available to the academic community. It is designed to explore
|
|
non-linear models and uses a Photoshop plug-in type system held
|
|
together through resource files and a little 68000 code. You can
|
|
write your own models and analytic tools for use by the program. It
|
|
actually multitasks, survives system crashes and automatically
|
|
performs tweening so you can generate movies of your models as they
|
|
change. I'll be happy to give you copies now, but it's in the alpha
|
|
stage (though there are few bugs) and I don't want to release it
|
|
while the interface is still in flux. It comes with a fast spatial
|
|
correlation test, a few differential and difference equations and
|
|
plenty of source code examples.
|
|
|
|
As to the rest of my vita, I'll be happy to provide references
|
|
on request and I welcome all inquiries. In short, I do not deny
|
|
that I lack a doctorate (as yet) or any other credentials
|
|
qualifying me as an 'expert' in computers. But I don't think
|
|
anyone qualifies. No one is an expert in *the law*, yet we have a
|
|
system of law with plenty of experts in various fields and a bulk
|
|
of precedents that we are all free to cite. The system coordinates
|
|
things through the use of enlightened self-interest. I believe a
|
|
coordinated (if loose) framework for interchangeable object code
|
|
will emerge from the market, given time. But if it does so, it
|
|
will be in the form of a monopoly and possibly at a high price.
|
|
(Monopolies are market optimal too).
|
|
I'm glad most people appear to have ignored my 'lack' of
|
|
credentials when they read the article. I myself rarely ask about
|
|
someone's credentials when I talk politics with them and I have
|
|
been pleased that many engineers, programmers and other sorts have
|
|
leant me an ear-both on line and off-without a second thought and I
|
|
hope that they continue to listen to other users out there.
|
|
Standardization *is* a problem that people perceive in political
|
|
terms with potential political solutions.
|
|
|
|
I find in general the denial that politics exists in the
|
|
computer market or anywhere a distasteful political tactic. I find
|
|
everywhere in online discussions a denial of the fundamental truth
|
|
that we are taught in grade school. We are the "government." Some
|
|
people have this Romantic idea of the internet community as a
|
|
liberated band of individuals freed from the bonds of "government"
|
|
intervention, living out on some frontier. Maybe no one else is
|
|
around, but whether it's the internet community setting standards or
|
|
our elected representatives operating through a (yes) bloated and
|
|
slow bureaucracy, people and institutions are involved and politics
|
|
lives on. That's the business of self-governance.
|
|
Denying the existence of politics-that we govern ourselves-in
|
|
any area attempts to hide legitimate differences between people and
|
|
only gives the upper hand to those who already set the agenda and
|
|
hold the power. I'm sorry if I sound like a revolutionary, but I
|
|
find the very idea that government in general has nothing to do in
|
|
setting standards on the Internet hypocritical. Without vast
|
|
government monies there would be no military, no public
|
|
universities (nor private ones on the current scale) and thus no
|
|
Internet.
|
|
I find the belief that government should fork over the money
|
|
and shut up about it even worse. It's the same argument used by
|
|
*some* artists trying to get money from the NEA, industries
|
|
trying to get price supports, and so on. It's an evil idea. Maybe
|
|
we do need all of these programs, but we are the government and we
|
|
have a right to see what we're buying in the full light of day. I
|
|
have no doubt that most of the money spent on the Internet has
|
|
given us something of value we would not have had otherwise. But
|
|
maybe we can do better. Would King Canute have been such a fool if
|
|
he had built a dike to stem flood-tides? Wouldn't we be fools if
|
|
we still believed economic forces like interest rates were also
|
|
controlled by the motions of planetary bodies?
|
|
|
|
In closing, I would like to publicly thank the CUD editors
|
|
for their patient assistance with the original piece. We had a lot
|
|
of problems with 'standards.'
|
|
|
|
Wade Riddick (riddick@jeeves.la.utexas.edu)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
End of Computer Underground Digest #6.68
|
|
************************************
|
|
|