Comments for Jeff Kramer Artisanal Technological Distractions Sat, 22 Mar 2014 16:51:37 +0000 hourly 1 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

Comment on Patently Processed by Mark Sun, 12 Jan 2014 23:29:30 +0000 Interesting perspective. I just received my first patent in the mail yesterday and my experience, as a self-funded garage inventor, was much different- harder, I think, because I had to find out what to do, who to contact, I no one to brainstorm with and no one to render an opinion on it’s chance of a patent being granted, nor whether it may be a commercial success. My attorney preferred to do everything via email, even though he lives one mile from me as the crow flies – which does not work well with concepts and new ideas The independent investor has a tougher road and it can be discouraging. I received back my first 3D printed prototype yesterday as well and it revealed some design challenges. I had to hire my own designer to give me input and to do the work (another $3,000).
My advice is to choose a hungry attorney with lower overhead who does not mind coaching you through the process and ask him for a total cost proposaI. Since I had gone through the process, unsuccessfully, a few years ago, I knew to get a competitive bid, but I think my attorney felt like he was not going to do anything more than our contract specified. I paid him $3500 plus filing fees, plus any draftsman fees if my drawings were not up to standard, and any additional time if there was an office action (questions from the USPTO examiner). I ran this patent and then another very similar through my first attorney, but I changed to a different attorney for my third application on a non-related device and had a great experience with him.

Comment on Building a Personal Cloud Computer by Jeff Wed, 02 Oct 2013 17:00:23 +0000 (re-post update to prior post) Jeff, thanks for the great article. Our frustration with current computing solutions is taking us down the PC2/PCC path you describe. While not there yet, we have taken what we believe to be the first logical steps by creating an easy to use cloud hardware service. We provide a la carte hardware and private cloud networking (SDN) for DIY users to build their own VM’s out of our 3 global data centers. From there we offer basic Linux and Windows OS’s but our hope is the developer community will create OS images integrating the functionalities you describe and then white label their solutions using the infrastructure and cloud resell programs (including a stable retail pricing model) we have created. We handle the infrastructure and let developers benefit from a plug-and-play way to do business. We believe the combination personal cloud computer/private cloud, familiar OS/low learning curve, developer add-on’s and an easy DIY model for the end user will result in a marketable PCC solution. We hope others find it useful in the pursuit of PC2/PCC realization. Check it out at