Chuck's News and Reviews

Applidium — News — Apple pulled VLC off the AppStore — iPad and iPhone application development

2011-01-10T16:21:00.000-08:00

Applidium — News — Apple pulled VLC off the AppStore — iPad and iPhone application development

I've been a fan of the GPL for many years and have watched it evolve as the Internet has evolved. In my opinion Apple's App Store does not violate the spirit of the GPL, even if it is possible to argue that the App Store forces Open Source developers to violate the letter of the GPL if they want to distribute their apps via the App Store.

Instead, iOS and the App Store represent a new model of computing and software distribution that was far from the mainstream when the GPL was defined, and the GPL now should be updated to address this new model.

When the GPL was written, and for most of its existence, virtually all software was developed on the same type of computer on which it was used. Therefore, any use who might want to modify program was likely to do so on the same computer (or at least one the same architecture and operating system) where they used the program.

The exception is embedded software, such as avionics or firmware in consumer electronic devices. In those cases, developers write and compile code on some kind of workstation, but run it on an entirely different kind of machine that -- and this is the important point -- could not be used as a development workstation.

So, for the vast majority of cases where Open Source software has been created, distributed, and used, its made perfect sense that the source code and object code be distributed together. In fact, the dominant model for Open Source distribution (although not the only necessary model) is that it is ONLY the source code that is distributed.

iOS brings to the mainstream a model much more like the "embedded" model described above, where the target computer (e.g. an iPhone) is NOT a practical platform for making modifications to a program. The vast majority, if not all, users who might want to modify an open source program for iOS will do so on a "traditional" workstation running Mac OS, Windows, or Linux, and then install their modified program on their iOS device.

The claim that Apple's App Store is incompatible with the GPL arises from the fact that the App Store and iTunes together restrict how a user can install programs that they download from the App Store (specifically that they can only install each app on up to 5 authorized computers and up to 7 iOS devices), whereas the GPL explicitly forbids such restrictions.

However, I argue that this reading is unnecessarily narrow, and that the language of the GPL should be revised to eliminate the apparent conflict.

Free Software Foundation Loses Its Mind

2010-10-31T16:12:00.001-07:00

I've always been a big fan of the Free Software Foundation, and these days its risky to disagree with anyone who criticizes Apple -- you'll almost certainly be labeled a "fanboy". But the FSF's recent attack on Apple's App Store is a stretch. There are so many problems with it that its hard to know where to start.

First, let's just say it. The the FSF, Gnu Project, and the Copyleft has been a godsend for software users. Without them we would be a decade or more behind where we are today in terms of innovation, and software would almost certainly cost a great deal more than it does now. But even friends overreach sometimes, and in this case I believe the FSF has done exactly that.

The guts of the argument being made by FSF is that Apple's Terms of Service violate the Copyleft by limiting what user's can do with any apps that they get from the App Store. The Copyleft clearly states that any developer who uses Copylefted software can't impose new restrictions on how user's can use and distribute that software.

In this case, Apple is an intermediary, and the App Store is providing an intermediate service. The specific restriction that Apple adds (at least the one specifically addressed in FSF's blog post about their complaint) is that users are only allowed to replicate each instance of an app on up to five compatible devices.

Of course, this is no restriction at all, since if that user has a 6 or more iOS devices, they can simply download another copy of any app the is free "as in beer" in addition to free "as in speech". FSF's complaint comes down to a nitpick about the way the App Store and iTunes manage installations on iOS devices, and not a threat to anyone's freedom or creativity.

In cases where developers are charging for Apps that have been written using Copylefted code, Apple's restrictions would force the user to purchase another copy of the software in order to use it on a 6th device. This might be a complain worth complaining about, but that beef would have to be with the developer, not Apple.

In my experience, the GNU project has done a fantastic job empowering developers and tech savvy users to do things that would otherwise be impossible -- the financial barriers would simply be too high. After decades of evolving, the community and movement are becoming more accessible to non-technical users.

Apple's "closed" operation of the App Store and tight controls over what can and cannot be distributed to iOS devices wrankle because they seem like the antithesis of what the "open" movement represents. But I disagree. If nothing else, Apple has created a system that shows everyone how things CAN work in the mobile world, and, as their success clearly demonstrates, this is an experience that a great many people want and are willing to pay for. Perhaps after decades or less evolving, the open movement will create a similar ecosystem that is as accessible to non-technical users and thus creates similar opportunities for developers.

Until then, however, FSF needs to back off. The end result of this current crusade will be nothing less than to exclude Copylefted software from the biggest mobile device ecosystem on the planet and deprive users the opportunity to use some really good software on at least the first five of their iPhones.

iPad Will Transform Print Media, Not TV

2010-03-04T23:46:00.000-08:00

That's right, folks. That cracking noise you hear is me, out on a limb, making a bold prediction somewhat publicly. Normally I would just think something like this to myself, so that I could later tell my friends "I saw that coming." However, just once, I would like there to be proof of my prescience. So here goes:

The killer app for iPad (and its ilk) is the printed word-- newspapers, magazines, and perhaps some books. Not video, and not games. Those will certainly be a big part of the iPad, along with music, email, and the web. But I think that iPad will ultimately rejuvenate and even transform organized journalism.

My argument was brazenly stolen by none other than Steve Jobs himself: "It has to do something better than a phone, and better than a laptop." And better than whatever else its replacing.

Blogs are great "long tail" outlets for journalism that would otherwise not see wide distribution. But there is much to be said also for the kind of editorial process that produces publications like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Economist, and The Smithsonian. These are what I like to read over coffee in the morning, or whenever I have a few quiet minutes throughout the day.

Physical newspapers and magazines have to be picked up or delivered, carried around, and then disposed of -- all wasteful, time and resource consuming activities with which I would happily part if there were some other way to get my reading fix.

Of course all of these pubs are available online, and I CAN get them both on my laptop and on my smart phone (an iPhone, if you must know). But I don't. Well, that's not quite true; I do pick up a few bits here and there, but not if I have to pay for it. Reading these pubs on a phone or laptop is just too awkward to enjoy.

But I can easily see myself flipping through virtual pages of pretty pictures and pithy words on an iPad, and happily paying for subscriptions. I may even feel a sense that I'm getting a bargain since I don't have to tramp through the snow to the end of my driveway or stop at the news stand, haul out piles of old papers, or feel guilty about killing trees. I have a feeling that I'm not alone.

So, in a few years, when we look back on the introduction of iPad (and similar devices) I predict that we will be saying that "iPad was to organized print journalism what iPod was to music".

Someone will be gloating. I hope it will be me.

Intelligent Design is not Science

2009-03-31T08:41:00.001-07:00

The war between science and religion remains a popular topic on television, and a particularly fascinating battle is the stand-off between evolution and intelligent design. So of course I feel obligated to weigh in.

Intelligent Design, as I understand it, is presented as a modification of theory of evolution. It says, basically, that although evolution happens, it is guided by the intentions of an intelligent creator.

Pure evolution and Intelligent Design are alternative ideas about how life on earth came to be as we see it. This much of the debate is legitimate.

However, science is a process, not a theory. This process is: come up with an idea, devise experiments to empirically test the idea, rethink your idea based on the results; and repeat until you lose interest. Ideas that survive many such cycles and remain consistent with observation are, loosely speaking, "scientific theories" and, more importantly, if your theory doesn't work, keep looking.

Intelligent design, on the other hand, specifically rejects the process of science. It says that certain body parts could not have evolved, and moreover that their origins are beyond the reach of science to explain: such parts could only exist if they had been designed by an intelligent creator who had the end result in mind. In other words, literally, "and then a miracle happens...".

As any cook or doctor can tell you, the whole is often greater than the sum of its parts, and yet this remarkable phenomena is never taught in mathematics classes, where the whole is always exactly equal to the sum of its parts.

So why would anyone want to teach intelligent design in a science class? Seriously, why?

Time for a Republican Party to Learn Tolerance

2009-03-03T18:02:00.001-08:00

Somewhere between Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan the Republican party went from being the party that freed the slaves to the party of "traditional family values".

So where does that leave people who believe in small government, free markets, and privatization, but also embrace cultural diversity, alternative lifestyles, and personal responsibility?

I think its time for parties to re-align their platforms. They way views are bundled now there is no comfortable fit, at least not for me. I am probably most closely aligned with the Libertarian party... but this is a party whose brand badly needs to be remade.

Dear Senator McCain

2008-10-23T20:08:00.000-07:00

Dear Senator McCain,

My friend, I've got to be honest with you: you lost me. I've been fan of yours since your 2000 speech when you declared that no candidate should be defined by extremists, be they religious, political, or ideological. The "straight talk" made you seem authentic, and your back story is worthy admiration. You were someone to whom I could relate.

What happened?

Its easy for someone like me to image that the evangelical right-wing conservative-dominated Republican political machine got hold of you and steered you inexorably and inevitably away from yourself. But I'm sure the truth is both less conspiratorial and more tragic.

I can only say what it looked like.

First, Sarah Palin? Really? I mean, sure, her record speaks of a talented, ambitious, energetic politician who is not afraid to shake things up. But I am simply not persuaded that she could step in if something were to happen to you. I mean, she staffed her administration in Alaska with high school buddies -- an unmistakable sign that personal loyalty and familiarity means more to her than competence. Where is the evidence than she can recruit, organize, and deploy the best and the brighest? I'm sorry, Senator, but I just can't imagine that you truly believe she was the best choice for America. No, what seems far more likely is that you accepted her in a cynical attempt to appeal to a bloc of voters who may not otherwise vote for you. If getting you into office requires that kind of sacrifice of principle, I guess I would rather have you stay in the Senate.

And that leads directly to strike two: what happened to "straight talk"? You haven't seemed nearly as authentic in the months leading up to the election as you did in the decades before. Its actually difficult for me to watch you speak now, mostly because it seems like you don't even believe much of what you say these days. You seem to be selling a story, instead of speaking from your heart. When you say "I don't care about a washed up terrorist... but we need to know the full extent..." Huh? That's not straight talk, that's gossip, and its beneath you.

And that brings me to strike three: the sum of what I've seen from you in the past few months paints a picture of someone who is scrambling to peice together an identity calculated to appeal to enough different groups voters to cobble together a victory. But the difference between that fagile and fragmented identity and who I thought you were is unsettling.

And so I won't be voting for you. If the pressure of a campaign can move you so far from away yourself, what would the pressure of holding office do to you? All I can say is, I don't like what I've seen so far.

Our Enemies or Ourselves - What will define the next four years?

2008-09-26T20:42:00.000-07:00

I just finished watching the first presidential debate between Senators Obama and McCain and, in my opinion, it succeeded in sharply defining the choice we face as Americans about to elect a new president: do we want to the next four years to be about defeating our enemies, or about making people's lives better here in America?

John McCain is a soldier, and he sees the world almost exclusively through that lens. To me this was demonstrated by the contrast in the tone of his responses on economic vs. military issues. When McCain said "the veterans know I will take care of them" it was clear from the way he said it that he feels this in the marrow of his bones. Conversely, when he said, several times, "we need to have oversight, we need to have transparency, and all that..." I couldn't help feeling that he was disengaged. It left me with the impression that, for Senator McCain, it all comes down to "winning the war in Irag is all that matters. Everything else will take care of itself."

On the other hand, Senator Obama provided less direct evidence of what defines his world view. For me, it seems to be that government serves the people, in the sense that, as a leader, you frame the issue, gather the best minds you can find, and insist that they craft a solution.

I have a great deal more confidence that Barak Obama will bring together and focus our govenrment on resolving the issues that define our times -- security, energy, the economy, and -- perhaps most importantly -- restoring the United States standing as a citizen in the world, than would John McCain. I believe that a John McCain administration would continue to focus on winning fights.

I honestly believe that both candidates demonstrated themselves to be serious men who have strong visions for America's future, but I also believe they demonstrated that they are qualified for different jobs: Barak Obama should ask John McCain to be his Secretary of Defense.

Book Review: The Secret History of the World

2008-08-04T22:31:00.001-07:00

In The Secret History of the World: As Laid Down by the Secret Societies, Mark Booth presents a way of interpreting major religious traditions as chapters in a single narrative explaining the evolution of the way humans experience the world. The book is part expose: Booth claims to be revealing views he has learned through nurturing relationships with "initiates" in The Mystery Schools, where esoteric wisdom dating to the beginning of time is still taught. In this sense, since Booth cannot cite his sources (who are sworn to secrecy), the book can only be read as speculation and not as a persuasive argument.

In short, the view Booth presents is that the physical world we know has been precipitated from the thoughts of the "cosmic mind". As the world -- and humans along with it -- gradually gathered form, our experience was shaped by waves of successively more material (and less powerful) spirit beings, until the world hardened to the point where the spirit world has been almost completely obscured. The stories of major religious and mythological traditions can be read as literal descriptions of the way humans experienced the world at different stages of this process. This "Secret History" provides a road map to the human mind that forms the basis of rituals that the secret societies use to unravel our material blinders reconnect with the spirit world.

Booth's way of relating and summarizing stories from these traditions is at times masterful. These are complex and subtle themse, and he makes them delightfully accessible. However, when he starts making arguments and drawing conclusions, he loses all grace. The experience is like finding a bitter pill in a delicious meal.

What I find most compelling in this book is the notion that ancient traditions share common themes and contain clues as to why we aprehend the world the way we do. We experience phenomenon all the time (e.g. intuition) that are beyond the current reach of science and reason, and the myths hold clues that can help us penetrate such phenomenon. This is not to say that reason is futile; rather, that esoteric contemplation can compliment reason, much as diplomacy compliments miltary force.

If you're a fan of astrology, or are interested in common themes across religions, you will probably enjoy this book. If you consider yourself to be a religious person, you may find it hard to endure.

Review: The Uncensored Bible

2008-06-26T03:02:00.001-07:00

In "The Uncensored Bible: The Bawdy and Naughty Bits of the Good Book" (Amazon) two biblical scholars and a journalist summarize and analyze a series of unorthodox interpretations of selected Bible stories that have been suggested by other biblical scholars. As the title suggests, these alternative interpretations have mostly to do with sex, drugs, depression, body hair, and excrement. Most of these theories hinge on alternate translations of key words from the original Hebrew that have been "sterilized" in modern English translations, or on key phrases that can be read as provocative euphemisms.

What is most clearly illustrated by this book, however, is that the foundation for any interpretation of the Bible is very shaky indeed. Consider the "telephone" party game: guests sit in a circle, and one person whispers a short sentence to the next person, who whispers it to the next person, and so on until the last person says aloud what they heard and everyone shares a good laugh at how unrecognizable the original message has become. Now imagine this game where each person in the circle has to translate the message into a different language before passing it along, and you get an idea of the journey the text of the Bible has taken over the past 3000 years from its original authors through to us.

By comparison, all approximately 4400 words of the US Constitution (the Bible has roughly 750,000 words) were written in modern English by people who are less than 10 generations removed from us, and they still require a panel of nine Supreme Court Justices and armies of constitutional lawyers to interpret their meaning.

The Uncensored Bible was a short, fun, and thought provoking read.

A great mystery solved?

2008-06-04T13:39:00.001-07:00

One of the greatest mysteries of the mobile web worker age is: why can't I use my cellphone as a wireless modem? The technology supports it -- Bluetooth has profiles specifically for this application, laptop drivers have it. Why don't vendors enable this?

I recently stopped by an ATT store to check out pricing and service plans for 3G Express Cards. The rate plan for a 3G card is $60/month for unlimited Internet access, which is about what I pay for my iPhone voice+unlimited internet access, also from ATT. "Is there a bundle price, since I already pay for Internet Access for my iPhone?" I asked. Of course not. How naive of me.

So the mystery is solved. If I could use my iPhone to bridge other devices (via Bluetooth) onto the Internet, then ATT couldn't sell Laptop cards. Wireless carriers still hang onto the belief that they can control the user's experience end-to-end, rather then just being a comodity service. But how can one company ever be really great at both operating a national cellular network and providing innovative consumer services? Enabling me to use my iPhone as a wireless modem with my laptop would increase the value of my iPhone, and my cellular service. For an additional $60 per month, its cheaper to just find a Starbucks, plus I get to have a cup of coffee.

There must be an objective way to determine when an industry reaches the point where denial of service takes over from innovation as primary driver (music, telecommunications, oil). This is the point where shareholder interests and customer interests go from being aligned to being opposed. I think it is scenarios like this one that fuel resentment of corporations and capitalism.

The Joy of Learning

2008-05-04T07:42:00.001-07:00

I ran across this quote in an article on the Languagehat blog that describes very beautifully how I experience learning:

The more things we know the better equipped we are to understand any one thing and it is a burning pity that our lives are not long enough and not sufficiently free of annoying obstacles, to study all things with the same care and depth as the one we now devote to some favorite subject or period. And yet there is a semblance of consolation within this dismal state of affairs: in the same way as the whole universe may be completely reciprocated in the structure of an atom, . . . an intelligent and assiduous student [may] find a small replica of all knowledge in a subject he has chosen for his special research. . . . and if, upon choosing your subject, you try diligently to find out about it, if you allow yourself to be lured into the shaded lanes that lead from the main road you have chosen to the lovely and little known nooks of special knowledge, if you lovingly finger the links of the many chains that connect your subject to the past and the future and if by luck you hit upon some scrap of knowledge referring to your subject that has not yet become common knowledge, then will you know the true felicity of the great adventure of learning....

(Quoted from Vladimir Nabokov: The American Years, by Brian Boyd.)

Lenovo vs. Apple

2008-03-20T19:17:00.001-07:00

Lenovo's new ad for its super slim ThinkPad X300 is brilliant, and enlightening. Road warriors were mercilessly teased when Apple launched a super light notebook with a full size screen and full size keyboard -- if only it wasn't a Mac! Now they can feel good about their side again: as Lenovo's ad deftly proclaims, the new ThinkPad has all the benefits of the MacBook Air with none of the compromises: You get thin, light, full size keyboard, full size monitor AND an optical drive, replaceable battery, and a full set of pots -- features that the MacBook Air famously lacks.

But what is equally remarkable, and not a little enlightening, is that Lenovo seems utterly oblivious to the obvious: the ThinkPad is ugly. MacBook Air is beautiful, sensual. It evokes an emotional response. Apple's industrial design magic is on full display in the Air.

By contrast, the ThinkPad -- like all ThinkPads -- is a study in form-follows-function design. It has the utilitarian aesthetics of an Army truck, its evolution driven from years of hard use, the rigors of its natural habitat reflected in its reinforced hinges, heavy duty latches, and its blocky, flat back body.

This contrast is heightened further by the motif of the ThinkPad ad, which is taken directly from Apple's ads for the Air. If you've seen those ads, what leaps off the page at you is not "What the Air could have been". Rather it is something more like... "That's no Apple."

Good old fashined ingenuity

2008-03-04T09:33:00.001-08:00

You gotta check this out:

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/03/serialmousedrive-etc.html

What cool examples of ingenuity have you seen?

Talking Popcorn

2007-12-10T05:54:00.000-08:00

Too cool :) Nina Katchadourian's sound sculpture puts an interesting perspective on the search for meaning and significance in patterns.

Science, Religion, Democracy, and Wikipedia

2007-12-05T05:46:00.000-08:00

A controversy currently raging in the Wikipedia community prompted me to think about the fascinating puzzle presented by "open" systems like Science and Democracy.

All such systems are based on a few rules (e.g. science begins with the idea that no fact should be held true in the face of contradicting evidence) and this eventually give rise to a guardian class whose job is to enforce the rules.

If the guardian class is too weak, anarchy is a likely result. If the guardian class is too strong, the system ceases to be "open" -- heresy is the life of a religion.

So how do you get the guardian class tuned just right?

Amazon.com's Kindle is iPod for Books

2007-11-22T00:05:00.000-08:00

Amazon.com recently launched its Kindle eBook reader, and I think its brilliant, but not in the way you might expect.

Much has been said about the amazing readability and battery life of the eInk display, which has been available in Sony's eBook Reader for some time. But as far as Kindle goes to emulate the experience of reading a book, it faces a major problem:

I love books. I love building my library, and I love being surrounded by my books. That's how I personalize my space. So, when I first heard about Amazon.com's new Kindle eBook reader, I didn't give it much thought. Until they come with something to put on my bookshelf and admire, I'm probably not going to invest in too many eBooks.

However, in addition to the 90,000+ books that are already available in Kindle format, Kindle versions of major newspapers and magazines are also available, and although I read many newspapers and magazines, I do NOT collect and archive those. I wouldn't mind replacing those with digital versions, but I don't want to deal with the hassle of downloading to my computer and then syncing to another devise. Its easier just to grab my paper from the mailbox and throw it in my backpack.

But here is where I think the Kindle could be a real breakthrough: Kindle includes free, wireless broadband, so that you can purchase reading materials directly from the device and it will download your reading materials automatically while you sleep -- no computer or syncing required!

Think of it: I can have my Wall Street Journal, along with a few blogs and maybe a magazine or two, delivered right to my briefcase, ready to read, by the time I wake up. No rain soaked Front Page when the little plastic baggy gets torn from an overzealous throw by the delivery boy. No more stack of dead processed trees accumulating in the garage to feel guilty about. And it weighs less, too! :)

I'm not sure Amazon imagined the Kindle as a replacement for periodicals, but I doubt I'm the only person for whom this particular value prop seems compelling. In fact, a lot of people like books... Why would Amazon.com invest so heavily in creating creating a 90,000+ volume library of Kindle books (including 100 of the 112 current best selling) instead of getting more publishers of periodicals lined up?

Simple: The Kindle could transform Amazon.com's business model and dramatically increase its profitability.

Amazon.com was on the vanguard of companies that did away with the storefront, and all its associated costs: real estate, insurance, labor, excess inventory, theft. Their virtual store allows them to offer lower prices and a broader selection than any other merchant in their market. But they still have massive central warehousing, inventory management, and shipping costs to deal with.

The Kindle has the potential to eliminate all this. Amazon.com's book business could end up looking a lot like Apple's iTunes, with similar margins. Taken in this light, Amazon's generosity in picking up the tab for integrated wireless service and heavy investment in accumulating content for the Kindle make a lot of sense.

Contacts 3.0 - The Future of Connecting

2007-10-10T17:35:00.000-07:00

Like many, I use email, Instant Messaging, and VoIP, as well as web meetings daily in order to work colleges and clients in different locations. I also work with many small groups across many organizations, so, although email is gloriously universal, that means I have to maintain accounts on several IM, VoIP networks, and web meeting services. Wouldn't it be nice if all of these services could be combined into a single, easy to use application?

Instant Messaging clients are increasingly combining presence, instant messaging, voice, and email. Add web meetings and we're almost there. But my friends still use different networks, and not all networks offer comparable combinations of features. The result is a hodge podge of people, applications, and services. Multi-protocol chat clients are s step in the right direction, but because of the difference in competing services, you end up with the least common denominator.

I would love to see a universal communicator that combined presence, chat, email, voice, video chat, along with desktop and application sharing, and that would be really cool.

Book Review: The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved

2007-04-02T22:18:00.000-07:00

The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved, by Mario Livio (amazon), is about the 18th century French mathematician, Evariste Galois, who invented Group Theory en route to proving that certain kinds of equations cannot be solved by formula. It is also about the role of symmetry in nature, and how Galois' invention, by providing the mathematical tools needed to reason about symmetry, has become a key tool in unlocking the secrets of the universe.

Unfortunately, this summary may be more focused and purposeful than Livio's book. The sweep of this short book (less than 300 pages) is ambitious -- it delves into the history of mathematics, the French Revolution, Relativity, String Theory, music, evolution and the role of symmetry in mate selection. I was never sure whethere Livio's intention was to reveal Galois' genius, convince the reader that symmetry drives the nature of the universe, or demonstrate the broad applications (and they are indeed broad) of Group Theory. The overall effect is a little scattered.

New World Order

2006-06-16T23:34:00.000-07:00

The day may come when the Information Age will be seen merely as a transitional period between the age of Industrial Design -- where intentions and actions could be directly aligned -- and the age Emergent Systems -- where results emerge, sometimes mysteriously, from simple and seemingly unrelated patterns of action.

One need not stir the hornet's nest of human evolution to find credible examples from which to gain insight: fractal images of stunning complexity and beauty arise from following simple rules; complex and regular grammatical structures are not designed intentionally but rather arise through our pursuit of economy and expressiveness.

The world is full of complex systems that were not directly designed, but instead arose indirectly through the actions of a community interacting with its environment. Power in this world comes from understanding and mastering the structures and policies that define such communities and channel their actions.

Messing with Myths

2006-05-04T19:24:00.000-07:00

Thomas Jefferson provides a particularly poignant example of the danger -- and ultimate futility -- of attempting to reconcile a heroic image with the historical figure that inspired it. In Jefferson's case, historical scrutiny of his character and actions suggests that he was anything but admirable by today's standards, and perhaps not even by contemporary standards as anything other than a supremely gifted writer. Contradictions abound throughout his writings and actions. Yet his image is held with reverence as a symbol of the American dream, the voice of liberty standing forth and asserting itself as the natural condition of all human beings.

People get understandably upset when you mess with their myths -- they represent what we hold most dear. When we honor our myths and heroes, we are celebrating images that evoke those things for which our souls most yearn. We are in effect reaffirming our identity. To attack someone's hero is (at a psychological level) to attack their very existence.

We often speak of historical figures who ascend into the pantheon of Heroes, but this is a false image. It might be a less troublesome formulation, if somewhat less poetic, to speak of a historical figure giving rise to a heroic image, for the fact is that while the Hero takes on a life of her own, the historical figure remains a fixed reference.

So too it is with celebrities; forgetting the distinction between one's public image and one's private self can cause no end of anguish for all involved.

This points to the central problem with any attempt to reconcile history with myth: history is a reflection of past events of which we are simply observers, whereas our myths are a reflection of ourselves.

Taken in this light, debate over the historical accuracy of the Bible is a further example of our tendency to confuse historical figures with the images they create, or worse, to deny that there is a difference.

This is not to suggest that historical study is unimportant, or to undermine the legitimacy of any mythical figure. It is only to point out that these two entities are distinct, that we have fundamentally different relationships with them, and that our understanding of each is driven by different forces.

Historians may feel that their subjects are distorted -- even maligned -- by popular imagery. Conversely, devotees may feel that historians are attempting to destroy their heroes with inconvenient and irrelevant facts. Ironically, living heroes may feel that their identity has been hijacked and their own reality cast aside through the admiration of the public, causing no end of anguish for all involved. This is a failure to admit the separate existence of a mythical image, based on the historical person, but now entirely distinct and owned exclusively by the public that created it.

It may be thought tragic that we go to such lengths to deny the existence of a distinction between the historical and the mythical, preferring instead to secure the Truth for ourselves: this formulation necessarily pits one camp against another in a fight to the death, since two contradicting understandings of the "same thing" cannot both be True.

But we are complex beings, and we improve ourselves sometimes by looking outward, deriving new insights by analyzing the past, and other times we look inward, increasing our wisdom by understanding ourselves.

Learning to Lead

2006-05-03T17:35:00.000-07:00

I recently came across an article that listed five qualities that are statistically common among leaders.

1. Character - this is the most important characteristic that holds up the "leadership tent"
2. Interpersonal skills
3. Leading change
4. Focus on results
5. Personal capability

I began to wonder, how useful is this information? If I identify these qualities in a person, can I assume that this person will be a good leader? If I focus on developing these qualities in myself, will I be a better leader? Let's have a closer look:

1. Character (this is the most important characteristic that holds up the "leadership tent")

Nope. Thomas Jefferson was – and was widely know to be – quite the duplicitous character. If by "Character" we mean an alignment between one’s convictions and one’s actions, Mr. Jefferson would probably not qualify. And yet he was, in many ways, a great leader.

Possession of an admirable character can (and often does) aid in one’s ability to lead by attracting the goodwill of workers. But will the pursuit of character make one a better leader? Or will recognition of character in another qualify that person as a leader? No. Unfortunately, the fact that most leaders that we admire are generally thought to have good character just isn’t very useful in making new leaders.

2. Interpersonal skills

The ability to communicate is vital, but again not sufficient. Will developing my interpersonal skills necessarily make me a better leader? Maybe. Will identifying someone with extraordinary interpersonal skills qualify that person as a leader? Nope.

3. Leading change

Well, "Leading" at least, but "Change" is pretty vague. But how does one lead? Does promoting change make me a leader? Or just a heckler?

4. Focus on results

Of the five qualities listed here, I believe this one comes closest to giving an aspiring leader something to work with. But it still falls short. What, exactly, is a leader’s necessary role regarding results? More to the point, in what way do I need to "Focus on Results" in order to become a more effective leader?

5. Personal capability

See "Character". Industry by itself does not a leader make.

One way to describe the job of a leader might be this (rather clinical) definition: Leading is the act of identifying a possible (but not inevitable) future, and enlisting others to bring that future into being.

If you do that, you are leading. If you don’t do that, you are not leading. And there are MANY ways to skin THAT cat.

This is a point that is all too often missed – what is a leader’s job? How do you know if you’re doing it well or poorly? How do you improve? Like golf, it’s a simple game, but endlessly complex in the forms, styles, and approaches one can employ successfully, and even more fraught with blind alleys and pitfalls. But at the end of the day, its all about fulfilling an extraordinarily simple objective.

Science and Religion

2006-04-08T20:45:00.000-07:00

He who says he knows, doesn't know. He who says he doesn't know, knows.

Despite what has often been asserted by persons on all sides of this debate, neither science nor religion has, or should have, the least thing to do with the pursuit of truth. Any practitioner who says otherwise ought be regarded with the utmost skepticism, for they are at best delusional and at worst have foresaken the rest of us in favor of a journey entirely for their own entertainment.

What then, if not truth, do science and religion seek? Power. One gives us power over the universe, and the other gives us power over ourselves.

The Traveling Organizer Problem: Fun with Time Zones

2006-03-22T22:58:00.000-08:00

Let's say you live in Los Angeles and you need to organize a meeting that will take place in Nashville, TN at some future date. To keep it simple, let's say that all of the other participants live, if not in Nashville, at least somewhere in the US Eastern time zone. Finally, on the day that you must schedule the meeting you are in Los Angeles.

How do you get the meeting request to apear on everyone's calendar at the correct local time for each participant on the day of the meeting?

Answer?

The only way to do it is to change your computer's time zone setting to the zone you will be in at the time of the meeting, send the meeting request, then reset the computer's time zone to your current locale.

Unfortunately, using this approach demands that you ALWAYS change your computer's timezone setting as you travel, because your appontments (at least those you requested using Outlook Meeting Request feature) will always be shown at the correct time for whatever time zone your computer thinks it is in.

If you're like me, you simply record items on your calendar as if it were a paper calendar. Such a calendar has perfect intelligence about your current locale and no intelligence whatsoever about where other participants might have been when the meeting was scheduled, or where they will be when the meeting occurs.

Though you may not realize it, such calendars are warped. Say you have an early morning meeting in Atlanta, then a 10:00am flight to Los Angeles that arrives at 12:00 noon, and more meetings starting immediately on your arrival that afternoon. Now, for the sake of argument, let's say you have a lot of work to complete on the flight and you like to keep a schedule. You've got five hours of uninterrupted time to schedule... but wait, there are only two hours of "white space" available on your calendar! Your calendar is warped.

Electronic calendars, such as MS Outlook, are not warped. Outlook stores all appointment times in UTC format, meaning that the locale of the meeting is effectively embedded in the time code.

Unfortunately, because of this, electronic calendars such as Outlook can be terribly difficult to use when you travel frequently. We need a better solution to this problem.

Unexpected Depth

2006-03-12T22:10:00.000-08:00

It is an odd and rare pleasure indeed to find depth and even perhaps profundity in unexpected places. About halfway through the Bill Murray movie "Groundhog Day" (yes, you read that correctly) on cable recently I was stuck with the realization that this movie may actually be a profound allegory on how to achieve hapiness in life. Even more surprising is the apparent source of the recipie. Curious? Read on...

The movie begins with Bill Murray as Phil Conors, a TV weatherman who is thoroughly disillusioned with life and who wears his cynicism hillariously on his sleeve. Phil finds himself stuck reliving the same day (Groundhog Day) over and over, apparently forever, until he gets it right.

What follows is a thoroughly entertaining and light-hearted comedy with Bill Murray at his wise-cracking best. But underneath the hilarity can be seen a deeper message.

When Phil first realizes what has happened to him, he is terrified, and sets about trying to find a way out. First physically, by leaving town, and then mentally by consulting friends, a doctor, and even a psychologist. Phil's first transformation comes when he realizes that no matter what he does, he's still going to wake up in the same bed at 6:00 am on Groundhog Day. In other words, there is no escape, there are no consequences, and so there is nothing to fear.

From there, Phill sets out to satisfy every desire: food, sex, money, love. He even devotes himself to trying to save a homeless man who maddeningly dies anyway. Finally, having run out of desires to satisfy and being consumed with a sense of utter futility, Phil decides to kill himself.

His final transformation comes when even his most creative efforts at suicide fail and he realizes that the only thing left to do is to let go of himself altogether.

Finally, things start to go his way. No longer living for himself, Phil gives to everyone he meets just what they seem to need at that moment -- validation to the guy at the top of the stairs, appreciation to the hotel matron, a helping hand to a choking man in the restaraunt -- expecting nothing in return. And for his efforts, he becomes the hero of the town, gets the girl, and finally escapes Groundhog Day, a changed man, ready to live happily ever after.

Put another way, a self-absorbed man is finally released from his suffering and finds happiness by transcending fear, extinguishing desire, and ultimately letting go of himself entirely.

Bill Murray following the footsteps of the Buddha? One cannot help but wonder...

Book Review: Will in the World

2006-02-20T18:11:00.000-08:00

For someone who is as poorly initiated to Shakespeare as I am, "Will in the World - How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare" by Stephen Greenblatt was a tough read, though I imagine that for someone more familiar with the plays this would be a ripping good read.

Very little is well documented about Shakespeare's life, so all Shakespeare biographies are even more speculative than most. In "Will in the World", Greenblatt attempts to piece together the story of Shakespeare's formative experiences by inference, as much from his theatrical writings as from the sparse letters, newspaper articles, and city records that suggest facts about Shakespeare's life.

Therefore, much of the book amounts to a forensic interpretation of Shakespeare's plays as a reflection of who he was. For example, Greenblatt speculates extensively that the recurrent character Falstaff could in fact a rendering of a contemporary poet and associate who made quite an impression on young Shakespeare (Robert Greene.)

But because the book relies so heavily on correlating imagery from the plays with known history of the times during which Shakespeare wrote them, its difficult for someone like me to have much confidence in Greenblatt's inferences. It comes off as so speculative that it left me wishing it had been written as a historical fiction.

Shakespeare is on my Lifetime Reading List; perhaps after I've studies the plays a bit more "Will in the World" will do a better job bring Will to life for me.

Why is BPM such a big deal?

2005-10-02T11:39:00.000-07:00

Business Process Management is to the Information Age what Logistics and Operations Research were to the manufacturing age, and it holds the same transformative power. How? In short, BPM technology underlies the knowledge-worker's equivalent of the assembly line.

Workflow solutions streamline the production of business information in much the same way that assembly lines streamlined the production of automobiles: the flow of work is automated, leaving individuals at each station free to concentrate on and develop skill for their individual task, resulting in higher throughput.

Furthermore, just as each assembly line is unique to a company or product, good workflow solutions will be continually adapted to local needs in order to maximize productivity.

Therefore, while BPM is enabled by technology and supported by IT, its application requires a new kind of business engineering that is focused on maximizing output while minimizing cost and time. This is firmly in the business domain -- not the IT domain.

Where, in the past, management has provided requirements for IT to fulfill, BPM calls for management to define the solution, leaving IT to implement and operate the solution.

The next long term surge in productivity in the economy will be fueled by BPM, and making the tools affordable and easy to use is the next step.

Book Review: Endless Forms Most Beautiful

2005-04-21T13:18:00.000-07:00

Sean Carrol's recent "Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo" (Amazon.com) adds depth to the lay understanding of evolution by describing precisely how mutations change the forms of organisms over time. The title cribs a famous quote from Darwin's "Origin of Species," and references to Darwin, Huxley, Stephen Jay Gould, and others are strewn throughout.

Dr. Carroll describes how a synthesis of embryology (the process of development from embryo to adult form), molecular biology, and paleontology -- known as Evolutionary Development -- leads to understanding the process of evolution. The chapters on molecular biology are dense enough to bottom out the non-biologist, but reading even without complete understanding helps to fill in the picture.

The blueprints contained in the DNA of all living things on Earth, from earthworms to butterflies to zebras to humans, are shockingly similar: they describe how to "build" modular structures like limbs, organs, and tissues that are similar in all species, and differences in form are mostly the result of how these blueprints are applied. Genetic "switches" control how "toolkit genes" are activated (or not!) to make stripes or spots, gills or wings, and fingers or hooves.

Dr. Carroll gives us a glimpse of the breathtakingly beautiful processes of life that deepens rather than dispells the mystery of how we came to be human.

Diskless DVDs

2005-04-05T00:53:00.000-07:00

I have two girls, ages 3 and 6, and they both have their own frequent flier cards for several airlines. The ability to watch Nemo and Dora the Explorer in flight is not a necessity, but it is as close as any entertainment can be.

Watching DVDs on a laptop is easy enough -- almost every laptop sold today has the right hardware and software included -- but you're stuck fumbling with a stack of DVDs.

Watching a DVD is one of the more power hungry things you can do on a laptop: wathing a whole movie may require some luck in addition to a full charge on the main battery. My laptop, like many, can use two batteries simultaneously, but the second battery goes in (wanna guess?) the DVD ROM drive bay.

Wouldn't it be nice if you could copy movies to your hard disk and watch them from there? No more fumbling DVDs and a lot less switching batteries!

I found a solution for doing just that that works very well, but it requires several tools, and still has some limitations.

First, most DVDs (certainly all of them that my children want to watch on airplanes) are copy protected -- you can't just "rip" them like you can your CDs. Even DVD archiving software will refuse to copy a copy-protected DVD.

Some of the copy protection schemes used are simply by agreement -- reputable software vendors agree to design their software to refuse to copy DVD content that is flagged a certain way. This is easy to work around -- just find a software vendor that isn't feeling quite so cooperative. However other protection schemes, such as "bad sectors", defeat would-be copiers by purposely inserting bad sectors (errors in the formatting) in the DVD content, effectively making Windows believe that the disk is damaged, and therefore not copyable.

AnyDVD from Slysoft.com solves this problem by adding a special driver to Windows that "descrambles DVD movies automatically in the background." Using this tool you can copy, archive, and even duplicate protected DVDs.

Which brings us to the second part of the problem: DVD movies are actually made up of many "files" that must be organized a certain way in order for you to watch the movie, so this structure must be preserved. There are probably ways to work with movie archives in the regular Windows filesystem, but I didn't take the time to figure them out.

Instead, I found another tool that makes this a non-problem. VirtualDrive from Farstone Technology allows you to capture images of CDs and DVDs and save the to your hard drive as ".VCD" files that can then be mounted as virtual disks. As far as Windows is concerned a mounted VCD image of a DVD is identical to a phyical DVD interted into an attached drive. So, you can play your captured DVD movies using any DVD player software exactly as you would with the phyisical DVD, but you can leave the DVD at home.

Side Note: My computer actually did not come with a DVD player, so it did not include the required DVD decoding software that is usually bundled with DVD ROM drives. (Windows Media Player cannot play DVDs without third-party DVD decoding software!) "DVD XPack" from Intervideo solves this problem with a Windows Media add-on.

So, now I can copy my kid's DVDs to my laptop and my wife an I can enjoy up to two batteries worth of uninterupted bliss.

However, problem remains, and it is one that raises some interesting questions for me:

Each captured DVD takes from 5 to 8 GB (yes Gigabytes!) of disk space. So after all this trouble, I still only have room for at most 2-3 movies on my laptop. I can double or even triple that by upgrading the hard disk in my laptop (largest on the market today is 100 GB), but we're still talking about a pretty small library (~10 movies), especially compared to the 10,000 songs that my iPod holds.

So, one might wonder, why has the movie industry invested so much in copy protection that inhibits legitimate use, like making it easier for my kids to watch movies on a computer? It is hard to imagine a successful Napster for movies -- a typical song is around 5MB, where a typical movie is at least 1000 times larger. Hosting a sharing site with a few hundred movies would require roughly a terabyte of storage, and downloading a 5GB movie would take hours. If Moore's law continued to apply to both storage and bandwidth it will be 2010 or later before sharing movies over the internet is really practical.

iPod, therefore I am

2004-08-17T23:15:00.000-07:00

OK, its a ripped off misqoute, but Apple remains the undisputed king of industrial engineering and product marketing. One might say that Apple is to the Classical Greeks as Microsoft is to Republican Rome. I know of no other company that can produce a hunk of plastic and metal that can inspire such affection. This gadget has reawakened my interest in music.

I just want it to ring!?!?!?

2004-07-28T22:58:00.000-07:00

I recently discarded my trusty Motorola V60 in favor of its presumptive successor, the V600 and, except for one annoying flaw, I love it. The phone book and dialer is the most useful and useable I've encountered since I gave up on carrying a Backberry, the speakerphone is great, battery life is more than adequate for my use, the built-in Bluetooth works flawlessly with my Jabra wireless headset, and -- surprisingly -- I love the camera! I use it to capture backgrounds of my two daughters; they think its cool, and I get to look at them every time I make a call.

But I hate the ringtones. Maybe its just me, but it has proven shockingly difficult to find a decent ringer for this phone. My brain is trained to spring into action, aroused, curious, and aware, at the sound of a phone ringing. My v60 had a pleasingly utilitarian default ringer that was piercing enough to be heard on the sidewalk or in the car with radio turned up.

In contrast, the default ringtones on for the v600 are gimmicky -- songs or sound effects that call forth anything but "turn on your brain and pick up the phone!" The ones that do sound like a phone are virtually impossible to hear over any background noise.

Maybe its me. Maybe I just havn't stumbled onto the trove of useful downloads for this phone that must be lurking out there somewhere.

Anyway, my message to Moto & company is this: Yeah, OK, you made your point. Now give me a ringer that sounds like a phone ringing.

First Post

2004-07-17T11:57:00.000-07:00

Welcome to Chuck's News and Reviews! Here you will find commentary, analysis, and speculation on a range of topics including books, politics, media, philosophy, family life, and the software industry. Watch this space!