Comments for Jeff Kramer Artisanal Technological Distractions Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:04:59 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Data Day Texas 2015 Recap by Happy New Year | Irma Kramer Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:04:59 +0000 […] And finally a high note, this weekend I attended Data Day Texas. The conference was a nice way to kickstart the year. The female to male ratio was great. I also won an Arduino Esplora at P.Taylor Goetz‘ talk “Beyond the Tweeting Toaster”! There were so many interesting talks that it felt like it could’ve been a two day conference. We were even given some space to setup a PyLadies table and talk to some wonderful women. Overall a good conference with unexpected bonuses! For a more comprehensive write-up on it checkout Jeff’s recap! […]

Comment on Dust Bunnies goes Open Source by This Week in Titanium Mobile Development: 4 Feb 2013 | TiDev Wed, 24 Dec 2014 14:57:01 +0000 […] Dust Bunnies for iOS goes Open Source (and art is CC licensed) […]

Comment on SXSW 2014: The One About Privacy by Jeff Kramer Sat, 22 Mar 2014 16:51:37 +0000 Eric and Jared were talking about transparency, and trying to poke holes in the argument that people like Julian Assange make that people in power don’t get away with large scale bad things when the documents finally get out, so we should have systems where everything the government does is open for public review. Any large scale action where there are multiple actors involved creates a paper trail, so if you expose that paper trail continuously to public scrutiny, you may still have bad actors, but society will be able to hold them to account.

Eric and Jared said something like this: “So in the book we imagined a country called Wikistan, one of those liberal northern european countries, where their law was that everything the government did had to be released for public inspection first. But what happens if the country needs to negotiate a treaty, it has no bargaining position because it has to release all communications first. What happens if another country decides to attack it, it’ll have to release all its defensive and attack plans before hand, and it’ll have to release that it’s going to make an attack before it happens.”

Their argument is an obvious straw man on the concept of transparency and how most people would like it implemented, probably even Assange himself. The issue we’re dealing with is a problem of default government secrecy, and secrecy as the default position to cover the government’s butt from embarrassment. That’s how you end up with 8 year lawsuits on the No-Fly program that covered up a simple government mistake. You could get rid of that just by having a set delay on everything, or a longer delay after planned actions (like treaty negotiations) take place. Some things, like lists of suspected terrorists or lists of foreign operatives or research and development don’t need to be public, but that’s maybe what, 1% of what the government classifies? It may be written better in the book, but if that’s their argument, it isn’t much of an argument at all.

Comment on SXSW 2014: The One About Privacy by Lindsey Sat, 22 Mar 2014 04:54:28 +0000 “One notable excerpt considering the Wikileaks presentation the next day were Eric Schmidt’s arguments against transparency, which boil down to ‘Imagine what would happen if everything was transparent and open, nations wouldn’t be able to defend themselves from aggressors because they’d have to publish their attack plans before hand,’ which is just, well. Ugh.”

I think I know your thoughts here but I am not entirely clear from this response–to me this argument seems very specious, slippery slope alarmism more or less. Could you clarify a little more?

Comment on SXSW 2014: The One About Privacy by cjovalle Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:45:56 +0000 It was good running into you and Irma. ^_^

I saw several of the same panels- Austin Kleon, Assange, Greenwald, Snowden, Tyson, and a few others. I was very impressed with the substance of SXSW this year.

I thought Peter Singer from the Brookings Institute had some interesting things to say in his cyberwar panel- his views seemed to be a good deal more nuanced than I’ve seen elsewhere. I wasn’t quite sure what to make of Schmidt. While I liked a lot of the main points of their talks, I found his and Gary Shapiro’s “deregulation” mantra off-putting. It’s great that Schmidt recognized wealth inequality as an issue, but I found it strange that he immediately followed those comments lauding practices that exacerbate wealth inequality. =P

I was actually a bit surprised by Snowden’s popularity- I expected that a lot of people agree with what he did, but I wasn’t really prepared for the extent of his backing. It seemed pretty clear that the majority of the tech community is completely behind him. The NSA (and their recent TED response) haven’t really been all that effective in their explanations.

Comment on Personal Cloud Innovation – SXSW 2013 Gold Badge Contest by SXSW 2014: The One About Privacy | Jeff Kramer Fri, 21 Mar 2014 16:15:00 +0000 […] into our friend Carlos Ovalle, who’d been live tweeting the conference.  Carlos won my Personal Cloud SXSW Badge Contest the year before, and it was great to see the conference was good enough for him to come […]

Comment on ffmpeg mkv DTS to AC3 transcode for Google TV by Hans Schulze Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:49:40 +0000 ffprobe -i file.mts will tell you what tracks are in the file

Comment on Patently Processed by John Shannon Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:15:15 +0000 Interesting site. HP have filed a number (my) patents, on ideas that where designed and documented by myself, and I don’t even work for them, have never worked for them. Am probably their leading kiwi inventor.

The Patent families are: Medical, Image Processing and Financial.

I did work for EDS, and was their leading inventor worldwide for a short period of time, and HP brought EDS.

(my), just means I’m the inventor and acknowledged as such, but HP is now the owner.

Would be interested to know Mark’s patent attorney’s contacts, since I have gone through and elaborate and time consuming process to get a pool of industry experts to independently review a bunch of ideas, and after the review, I search on Aust IP and USPTO to see whether they are unique.

Through this process there are a number ideas that can be patented.

BTW HP now allow their staff to independently patent their own inventions, and are non-work related, and keep all spoils from that endeavour.

In my mind though they need to go a step further, and follow the Stanford approach.

If you don’t want to pay any fees for the lifetime of a patent, that is lust filed locally (which will be considerable on a utility patent), you just need to become a student at stanford, file the idea locally, with their IP Team, and if they can see merit, with the idea either furthering their research ambitions, or its a breakthrough invention that can would credit kudos for the university and draw more students, or it is highly licensable to businesses, they will fund all costs, and give you 1/3 of all gross revenues.

Gross, since they get 2/3 of all revenues which may or may not cover all their costs. You would be a student, and its expensive being a student at stanford.

You don’t qualify as a free MOOC student, but if anyone has ideas about how to become a low cost student internationally, please let me know.

Comment on The Quantified Car: Progressive Snapshot by james shaffer Fri, 31 Jan 2014 23:53:17 +0000 Progressive is a non-standard market for pieces of business that present themselves, but that I wouldn’t/couldn’t place with my preferred carriers. That being the case, my typical insured with Progressive almost always (95% of the time) have poor driving habits/records and in my opinion are cynical about the program and their ability to navigate the process and gain a discount. Do executives at Progressive realize who their customers are?

Comment on Building a Personal Cloud Computer by pgraves Sat, 25 Jan 2014 22:43:25 +0000 Jeff, great article