Skip to main content

Watching Apple vs FBI With Worry

I’m watching the Apple vs FBI case with a cautious eye, worried about the outcome and really without much of a clue where its going to go. At this point we have a situation I can’t feel comfortable on either side of. Do I want an enormous multi-national billions-rich company refusing to follow court orders? That’s the kind of situation that would usually have me calling for pitchforks, probably metaphorically but increasingly physically. Yet, in this case, I can’t help but find that I agree with the specific case. Encryption, I believe whole heartedly, is a human right. … Don’t I? So what do I do when the hands that protect that are owned by share holders? We’re in a position that we shouldn’t be in. We have government agencies like the FBI and the NSA and the Department of Defense which should be tasked with protecting us and, therefor, with protecting the mechanisms that keep both our physical and ephemeral property safe. The NSA should be funding real encryption and promoting public awareness of keeping their data out of anyones hands, including their own. The FBI should be going after companies that offer shoddy encryption that puts our information in harms way, not strong arming them into crippling it. I worry that there will be a day when I look back at the Age of Encryption. I worry that I’ll have to explain the concept of secrets and privacy to a future generation the way I explain to my son today that our phones used to be tied to the walls.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why I Switched From Git to Microsoft OneDrive

I made the unexpected move with a string of recent projects to drop Git to sync between my different computers in favor of OneDrive, the file sync offering from Microsoft. Its like Dropbox, but "enterprise."

Feeling a little ashamed at what I previously would have scoffed at should I hear of it from another developer, I felt a little write up of the why and the experience could be a good idea. Now, I should emphasize that I'm not dropping Git for all my projects, just specific kinds of projects. I've been making this change in habit for projects that are just for me, not shared with anyone else. It has been especially helpful in projects I work on sporadically. More on why a little later.

So, what drove me away from Git, exactly?

On the smallest projects, like game jam hacks, I just wanted to code. I didn't want to think about revisions and commit messages. I didn't need branching or merges. I didn't even need to rollback to another version, ever. I just …

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…