Adventures of a Wetware Hacker

2009-03-14T18:07:00.000-07:00

A Happy Pi Day to all!

For your viewing pleasure:

2009-02-26T15:17:00.000-08:00

Here's what I got with for this random little game that's going around the internets. If you want to create your own album cover, here are the rules:

1. Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random - The first article title on the page is the name of your band.

2. Click http://www.quotationspage.com/random.php3 - Click "New Random Quotations", The last four words of the very last quote is the title of your album.

3. Visit http://www.flickr.com/explore/interesting/7days/ - The third picture, no matter what it is, will be your album cover.

4. Use your graphics program of choice to throw them together, and post the result.

2009-02-21T13:48:00.000-08:00

Navy-funded report warns of war robots "going Terminator"

ONR Report [pdf]

The report urges programmers of war-robots to include ethics subroutines, resembling a warrior code of ethics.

Patrick Lin, the chief compiler of the report, says: "There is a common misconception that robots will do only what we have programmed them to do. Unfortunately, such a belief is sorely outdated, harking back to a time when programs could be written and understood by a single person."

He says the key to avoiding robotic rebellion is to include "learning" logic which teaches the robot the rights and wrongs of ethical warfare. This logic would be mixed with traditional rules based programming. "We are going to need a code. These things are military, and they can’t be pacifists, so we have to think in terms of battlefield ethics. We are going to need a warrior code."

So... The military will pay programmers to write ethics subroutines? As a programmer with a philosophy major... I might one day have a job! Terminator scenarios: Employing those with unmarketable skills since 2009.

I'm reminded of something a friend (Dan, who probably got it from a scifi fanfic) once wrote:
"What is the Universal Truth?"
"The geeks shall inherit the Earth!!"
"Why?"
"Because they’ll save our asses someday!!"

Hmm. The more I think about this, the more I wonder if it's something I'd actually like to do with my life. My views on artificial ethics and intelligence are certainly unconventional, but I do think about it a lot. I have built robots. I have programmed for the military. I have read a great deal on ethics and logic. And I thoroughly enjoyed it all. This might be one of the few jobs that could successfully compete with the Internet for my attention span...

I'll be back. To make sure that you're doing alright.
Would you like a cup of tea?

--
Sources:
DailyTech Article
Fox News Article (polemically hilarious)
ONR Report [pdf]

2009-02-18T09:52:00.000-08:00

How to Evade Your Civil Duties:

1. Move to Arkansas. Their newly-amended constitution should serve you right:

HJR 1009: AMENDING THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REPEAL THE PROHIBITION AGAINST AN ATHEIST HOLDING ANY OFFICE IN THE CIVIL DEPARTMENTS OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS OR TESTIFYING AS A WITNESS IN ANY COURT.

Seriously.

So, if you want to commit murder, do it in a room full of your friends! (Who are probably all godless heathens like you.) If you get called for jury duty, don't fret, silly atheist -- you're not the peer of a believer!

2. Alternatively, you could move to Texas. Their Bill of Rights has a section for you:

Article 1, Section 4: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

Whew. Almost thought we were going to be granted the public trust of Texas. That would have been embarrassing. When you're not given full rights in these states, you're doing something right.

We atheists, therefore, should enjoy being persecuted! As USN says, there's a special place in heaven for atheists who endure this nonsense.

2009-02-17T14:10:00.001-08:00

Four suns connected by a ring in the sky!

Beautiful! Incredible! One of nature's wonderful illusions!

...I won't say it, but you know I'm thinking it.

2009-02-12T16:50:00.000-08:00

Darwin Day Cake!

Happy 200th Birthday, Darwin!

2009-02-12T11:31:00.000-08:00

Happy Darwin Day to all!

Fun Darwin Facts:

1. Darwin saw no significance at first in the finches of the Galapagos. He dutifully collected and tagged his samples, and it was only when some of the labels were lost and he became frustrated about how similar they appeared that he thought they might all be related.

2. Darwin performed a substantial amount of his research by becoming a Victorian era pigeon fancier. These men doted over their birds and bred them for specific characteristics, and although some breeders claimed that they could develop any trait given enough time, none of his fellow fanciers thought this might possibly be an indication that all the known breeds were actually the result of breeding from one ancestor pigeon.

3. Some scholars feel that Darwin believed in recapitulation. What is that? Basically, it's the idea that a blastula is the equivalent of primordial soup, and as the fetus develops, it mirrors evolutionary development. We know Darwin thought this because he wrote about how similar all puppies look (round, chubby, tiny appendages), and yet they all develop into very different breeds. This is because the “essential puppy” morphology is actually the original dog morphology.

4. In Darwin's first edition of the Origin of Species, he asks his reader to contemplate the possibility of a bear becoming a whale-like animal if it spends all of its time in a river hunting. We know today from skeletal structures such as the pelvis and vestigial legs that whales are indeed actually land animals that returned to the aquatic environment.

5. Darwin married his cousin, but only after long debate. He drafted a pro and con list to decide whether or not he was the marrying type. Although he would have less freedom, he decided in favor of marriage because it would offer him good company. At least company better than a dog, he wrote.

6. Erasmus Darwin, Charles's grandfather, had many ideas that are very similar to what we know as (Charles) Darwinian Evolution and contributed a lot to Charles's own ideas. Erasmus is best known for 'Zoonomia' which is filled with precursors. However, Erasmus also writes that whatever the male is fancying during the time of copulation will be what the fetus develops into. In other words, a mating frog may see a chicken walk by and think that the chicken is rather sexy, thus producing a baby frog that very closely resembles a chicken.

7. While in the Galapagos, Darwin gave special attention to the lizard population. He referred to a species of black lizard as “imps of darkness” that were extremely ugly, and performed experiments in which he would hurl a lizard as far as possible into the ocean to puzzle over how it well it could swim, yet how it hated being in the ocean.

8. Darwin remarks repeatedly on the naiveté of the birds of the Galapagos, and how easy it is to kill them. He observed a local boy catching the birds for food by simply sitting next to a source of water, grabbing a visiting bird, and SNAP.

9. Another scientist, Alfred Russell Wallace, also came up with evolution. He wrote to Darwin asking for his opinion, Darwin panicked, and at the advice of colleagues, finished the Origin of Species as soon as possible, leaving out much of what was intended to be included. Wallace and Darwin published together, but as the idea stuck, Wallace began referring to evolution as “Darwin's idea” and considered himself lucky to even be friends with Darwin.

10. Darwin was a tad neurotic, and wrote down almost every idea. From all his letter, notebooks, diaries, etc., it is easy to see the evolution of the idea of evolution. The biggest obstacle to Darwin scholars today is not finding material, but reading Darwin's handwriting.

2009-02-06T16:55:00.001-08:00

The Media.

I rarely watch TV. The news is much easier to get online; it's much easier to access a wide variety of sources, to learn background information about current events, and to speak to people directly involved in the news at hand. However, I'm wondering if my neglect of television has been a mistake.

I spend a lot of time in a particular coffee shop; I take my laptop here during the day, and sit under a huge flatscreen TV that is forever tuned to CNN. Now, CNN is one of the more reputable news sources out there, especially when compared to Fox News or MSNBC. However, the last few days of exposure to this mainstream news channel have startled me -- CNN is an incredibly polemic channel.

The rhetoric they use is absolutely sensational, although this was easily guessed. But the news they provide is utterly unhelpful -- all about soundbites, entirely one-sided -- I guess, it's everything I've read about mainstream media. The media is constantly denigrated by reasonable people, for a variety of reasons. But the shocking part is: these reasons, they're all true.

I'm watching coverage of the Salmonella outbreak now. They're interviewing a little kid that got Salmonella from peanut butter -- he's spouting words and concepts he clearly doesn't understand: "I think... (pause, looks questioningly off camera) I think we should re... recall all peanut butter products, and... (looks off camera again) ..test them all, and create another federal institution in charge of testing all the food. The FDA isn't keeping me safe. The FDA made me want to die." [Reporter smirks satisfactorily at camera.] The camera pans to some seriously disgusting-looking peanut butter, as the off-screen voice tells us, "The FDA is incapable of keeping us safe. This has been the largest food recall in history."

How is this helpful at all? How does this do anything except incite panic? If CNN were reasonable, they'd put together a nice report on the pros and cons of the FDA, how it's helped, where it's failed, and compare/contrast the possibility of a new food regulatory agency. The situation would have been handled calmly, intelligently, and informed the American people, who will instead undoubtedly be calling their representatives in a panic, screaming blindly for reform. No wonder Americans are ignorant about politics -- this is the news we stand.

Journalism is dying, not because people aren't consuming, but because we all want to be in a reality TV show. The problem is, real life doesn't have an editor to step in and save the day at the end. The more polemic entertainment we demand, the more Americans walk around feeling as though the world will end. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

There will, mark my words, be talk of a new regulatory agency in the wake of these outbreaks. And maybe that's a good thing. God knows the FDA is terrible. But will the process be nuanced? Will our choices be educated? I doubt it. This television is sickening. That's what we call the news...

2009-02-03T14:31:00.001-08:00

Robot Love

I read an interesting passage today in Ger Gigerenzer's Gut Feelings: The Intelligence of the Unconscious. The focus of his book is the idea that effective intuitive processes are the product of discarding information -- not retaining it. He illustrates his point with a short story, The Fable of Robot Love. The point is interesting, so bear with it:

In the year 2525, engineers finally managed to build robots that looked like humans, acted like humans, and were ready to reproduce. Ten thousand robots of various types had been built, all of them female. A research team set out to design a male robot who would be able to find a good mate, found a family, and take care of the little robots until they were able to take care of themselves. They called their first model Maximizer-1, M-1 for short.

Programmed to find the best mate, M-1 proceeded to identify a thousand female robots that fit his goal of not marrying a model older than himself. He detected five hundred features on which individual female robots varied, such as energy consumption, computing speed, and frame elasticity. Regrettably, the females did not have their individual feature values printed on their foreheads; some even hid them, trying to fool M-1. He had to infer these values from samples of behavior.

After three months had passed, he had succeeded in getting reliable measures on the first feature he tested, memory size, from each female robot. The research team made a quick calculation of when M-1 would be ready to pick the best and discovered that no one in the team would still be alive at that point -- nor would the best female robot.

The thousand females were upset that M-1 could not make up his mind, and as he began recording the second feature, the serial number, they pulled out his batteries and dumped him in a scrap yard. The team went back to the drawing board.

M-2 was designed to focus on the most important features and to stop looking for more when the costs of collecting further information exceeded its benefits. After three months, M-2 was exactly where M-1 was, and in addition was busy measuring the benefits and costs of each feature so that he could know what to ignore. The impatient females ripped out his wires and got rid of him, too.

The team now adopted the proverb that the best is the enemy of the good, and designed G-1, a robot who looked for a mate that was good enough. G-1 had an aspiration level build in. When he encountered the first female who met his aspiration level, he would propose to her -- and ignore the rest. To make sure that he found a mate if his aspirations were too high, he was equipped with a feedback loop that lowered the aspiration level if none of the females were good enough for him over too long a period. G-1 showed no interest in the first six females he met, but then proposed to number seven. Short of alternatives, she accepted.

Three months later, to everyone's pleasure, G-1 was married and had two small kids. While writing the final report, however the team learned that G-1 had left his wife for another robot. Nothing in his brain had prevented him from running off to what looked to him like a better deal. One team member pointed out that M-1 would never have left his wife, because he would only have accepted the best in the first place. That's true, responded the others, but at least G-1 found one.

The team discussed this for a while and then came up with GE-1. He was happy with a good enough female, just like G-1, but was additionally equipped with an emotional glue that was released when he met a good enough robot and adhered more strongly with physical contact. Just to be sure, they inserted a second form of emotional glue into his brain that discharged when a baby was born and tightened after each physical contact with the baby.

GE-1 proposed to a female as quickly as G-1 did, married, and fathered three babies. He was still with them when the team finished their report. He was somewhat clingy, but dependable. Ever since, GE-1 robots have conquered the earth.

In the fable, M-1 failed because he tried to find the best, as did M-2. Both ran out of time. G-1 was fast by going for a good enough choice, but was also fast in dropping it. However, the capacity for love, the glue, provided a powerful stopping rule that ended GE-1's search for a partner and strengthened his commitment to his loved ones.

Similarly, feelings of parental love, triggered by an infant's presence or smile, free parents from having to decide every morning whether they should invest their resources in their children or in some other business. The questionof whether it is worthwhile to endure all the sleepless nights and other frustrations of having a child simply does not arise, and our memory ensures that we forget these tribulations soon.

The evolved brain keeps us from looking too long and thinking too much. That is what love is. ;-) The culture it is embedded in influence what the objects of love or trust can be, or what makes us upset or feel hurt.

Gigerenzer goes on to discuss this problem in humans -- the deliberate search for the best can conflict with emotions (pride, honor) in humans. Johannes Kepler, for instance, was short, sickly, and born into a poor family. However, his fame and intellect ranked him a good catch. In 1611, he left his unhappy and arranged marriage, and embarked on a systematic search for a second wife. Unlike Barbara Bush, who "married the first man she kissed," Kepler investigated eleven (!) possible replacement wives in under two years. His friends urged him to pick bachelorette number four, a refined lady of high status and dowry, but he insisted on being thorough. This insulted the fine lady, and she rejected him in the end.

2009-01-27T18:41:00.000-08:00

An interesting resource on martial law in the US.

2009-01-23T00:53:00.001-08:00

The Wisdom of Jean Rostand:

Falsity cannot keep an idea from being beautiful; there are certain errors of such ingenuity that one could regret their not ranking among the achievements of the human mind.

In order to remain true to oneself one ought to renounce one's party three times a day.

In politics, yesterday's lie is attacked only to flatter today's.

Stupidity, outrage, vanity, cruelty, iniquity, bad faith, falsehood - we fail to see the whole array when it is facing in the same direction as we.

Science has made us gods even before we are worthy of being men.

It is sometimes important for science to know how to forget the things she is surest of.

There are certain moments when we might wish the future were built by men of the past.

Think? Why think! We have computers to do that for us.

Truth is always served by great minds, even if they fight it.

It takes a very deep-rooted opinion to survive unexpressed.

Never feel remorse for what you have thought about your wife; she has thought much worse things about you.

A few great minds are enough to endow humanity with monstrous power, but a few great hearts are not enough to make us worthy of using it.

The divine is perhaps that quality in man which permits him to endure the lack of God.

A man is not old as long as he is seeking something

2009-01-22T13:06:00.000-08:00

How to debug a C program.
--------------------------

1] If at all possible, don't. Let someone else do it.
2] Change majors. (Win.)
3] Insert/remove blank lines at random spots, re-compile, and excecute.
4] Throw holy water on the terminal.
5] Dial 911 and scream.
6] There is rumour that "printf" is useful, but this is probably
unfounded.
7] Port everything to CP/M.
8] If it still doesn't work, re-write it in assembler. This won't fix the
bug, but it will make sure no one else finds it and makes you look bad.

PASCAL is not a language. It was an experiment combining the flexibility of C with that of a drug-crazed penguin. It is also the 'language' of choice of many CS professors who aren't up to handling REAL programming. Hence, it is not a language.

C is almost a real language. (see assembler) Even the name sounds like it's gone through an optimizing compiler. Get rid of all of those stupid brackets and we'll talk. (see LISP)

ASSEMBLER is a language. Any language that can take a half-dozen keystrokes and compile it down to one byte of code is all right in my books. Though for the REAL programmer, assembler is a waste of time. Why use a compiler when you can code directly into memory through a front panel?

How to program in C
---------------------
1] Use lots of global variables.
2] Give them cryptic names such as: X27, a_gcl, or Horace.
3] Put everything in one large .h file.
4] Implement the entire project at once.
5] Use macros and #defines to emulate Pascal.
6] Assume the compiler takes care of all the little details you didn't quite
understand.

If you put garbage in a computer nothing comes out but garbage. But this garbage, having passed through a very expensive machine, is somehow enobled and none dare criticize it.

Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.

2009-01-21T10:06:00.000-08:00

Dethroning Python? Brief Words On Haskell.

Python had long been my favorite programming language -- its power and ease of use made for short, elegant, and readable code. But then, a year or so ago, I started messing around with Haskell. And even though I've yet to use it for a practical purpose, I loved it. So subtle! So sophisticated! And it gets better with age. If programming languages were men, I may have met James Bond.

2009-01-20T13:08:00.000-08:00

American Atheists, Agnostics, and Nonbelievers celebrate: Obama just made us citizens.

"We are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers."

This sentence from Obama's inaugural address is buzzing all over atheist blogs, twitters, and status messages. I got three text messages quoting it within 30 seconds after it was spoken. Already, "nonbelievers" feel justified -- this is, after all, the first time we've been recognized in an inaugural speech. In fact, it's one of the first times "nonbelievers" were mentioned in politics without being followed by, "...aren't citizens," or "...are ruining Christmas," etc. And we think this is progress.

However, Rick Warren's "prayer" (which felt more like an empty, obligatory political manifesto) was a tragedy to be laughed at. Half-hearted, insincere, and startlingly lame. He didnt even register in my brain as an adversary -- as most atheists would expect him to. He came of as pitiful, stupid, confused -- so distanced from reality it was almost sad. This article might be relevant.

It does seem, at least on paper, that Obama is also paying lip service to the Constitution. Have a look at the (shiny new!) whitehouse.gov's technology page. Is there still hope for civil liberties in America? Let's hope so. Good luck, President Obama!

2009-01-18T16:50:00.000-08:00

2009-01-17T11:17:00.000-08:00

Israel.

Upon learning that it's a federal offense to boycott Israel, I immediately wondered what products would be boycotted. After a quick search, there seems to be a myth floating out there that says Israeli products can be recognized by a barcode that starts with 729. This doesn't seem to be true, according to this Bar Code FAQ:

Does the barcode number indicate the country of origin of a product?

No it doesn't. The 3-digit prefix code indicates which GS1 numbering organization has allocated the block of numbers to the company. Once the company has been assigned the block of numbers, they self assign each individual number in the block to a given product. For example, a company may have it's headquarters in South Africa. The GS1 organization in South Africa has the code "600", but all the products of the company may be manufactured in England. The English-made products would still have the "600" prefix code. The prefix code is a way to have 70-plus GS1 member organizations issuing numbers without having to worry about duplicate numbers. The 3-digit prefix indicates the country of the GS1 organization that issued the block of numbers, not the country of origin of the product. GS1 (the international organization that administers UPC and EAN) has a clear statement that the prefix DOES NOT indicate the country of origin of the product. A list of country codes can be found on the UPC & EAN Page.

If you're outside of the US, and/or don't mind breaking this federal law, you might wonder how one might spot a product exported from Israel.

The answer is to download a database that matches all UPC product codes (barcodes) on the market as of yet to their respective manufacturers. You can actually download such a database as it is free and distributed under the Creative Commons license (here). Then, simply do a search for "Israel" to find which companies market products which are made in Israel.

Good news: A user named Toshibu has already done the work for us!

Here is a comprehensive spreadsheet of all companies exporting products from Israel.
Here is a comprehensive chart of all Israeli products registered by UPC to date.

To recreate the above results, the following commands may be used:

$ wget >
$ tar zxf upcdatabase-2009.01.01.tar.gz
$ cd upcdatabase-2009.01.01
$ grep -i "israel\"" glns.csv | awk -F, '{ print $1 }' | cut -c 8- --complement | awk '{print "^"$0}' | grep -f - items.csv > items-israel.csv
$ cat items-israel.csv | awk -F, '{ printf( "%s %*s %s\n", $1, 36, $2, $3 ) }'

That said, maybe Israel doesn't deserve a boycott. After all, the point here isn't the mass slaughtering of innocent civilians in a brutal, racist manner -- oh, wait. After the Holocaust, didn't we all swear it, "Never Again"? Glad to see we haven't forgotten.

Maybe it's genuinely self-defense. Maybe Israel has no choice here. Maybe it's because the Palestinian rockets are so powerful compared to Israeli airstrikes? Oh, wait. Can you guess which is which?

Or maybe it's because Israel can do no wrong. Maybe they are teaching their children to learn from the past, preaching tolerance and love instead of violence and hate? "With love, from Israel." Yeah. I can see that. Good job, guys, you killed the terrorist.

The worst part is, when the UN made a plea for the violence to cease, nobody listened. Because we all expected them to listen, right? Right?

2009-01-15T11:50:00.001-08:00

Happy Birthday, Wikipedia!

It's funny because that's how it's pronounced... [citation needed]

2009-01-14T11:28:00.000-08:00

Lasantha Wickrematunge, a Sri Lankan journalist for The Sunday Leader, wrote an editorial to be published in the event he were assassinated. He was assassinated. Here is the editorial: And Then They Came For Me.

Even if the middle paragraphs are obscure, the last few paragraphs are very worth reading.

Since access to this site has been sketchy, here is the text:

Editorial

And Then They Came For Me

No other profession calls on its practitioners to lay down their lives for their art save the armed forces and, in Sri Lanka, journalism. In the course of the past few years, the independent media have increasingly come under attack. Electronic and print-media institutions have been burnt, bombed, sealed and coerced. Countless journalists have been harassed, threatened and killed. It has been my honour to belong to all those categories and now especially the last.

I have been in the business of journalism a good long time. Indeed, 2009 will be The Sunday Leader's 15th year. Many things have changed in Sri Lanka during that time, and it does not need me to tell you that the greater part of that change has been for the worse. We find ourselves in the midst of a civil war ruthlessly prosecuted by protagonists whose bloodlust knows no bounds. Terror, whether perpetrated by terrorists or the state, has become the order of the day. Indeed, murder has become the primary tool whereby the state seeks to control the organs of liberty. Today it is the journalists, tomorrow it will be the judges. For neither group have the risks ever been higher or the stakes lower.

Why then do we do it? I often wonder that. After all, I too am a husband, and the father of three wonderful children. I too have responsibilities and obligations that transcend my profession, be it the law or journalism. Is it worth the risk? Many people tell me it is not. Friends tell me to revert to the bar, and goodness knows it offers a better and safer livelihood. Others, including political leaders on both sides, have at various times sought to induce me to take to politics, going so far as to offer me ministries of my choice. Diplomats, recognising the risk journalists face in Sri Lanka, have offered me safe passage and the right of residence in their countries. Whatever else I may have been stuck for, I have not been stuck for choice.

But there is a calling that is yet above high office, fame, lucre and security. It is the call of conscience.

The Sunday Leader has been a controversial newspaper because we say it like we see it: whether it be a spade, a thief or a murderer, we call it by that name. We do not hide behind euphemism. The investigative articles we print are supported by documentary evidence thanks to the public-spiritedness of citizens who at great risk to themselves pass on this material to us. We have exposed scandal after scandal, and never once in these 15 years has anyone proved us wrong or successfully prosecuted us.

The free media serve as a mirror in which the public can see itself sans mascara and styling gel. From us you learn the state of your nation, and especially its management by the people you elected to give your children a better future. Sometimes the image you see in that mirror is not a pleasant one. But while you may grumble in the privacy of your armchair, the journalists who hold the mirror up to you do so publicly and at great risk to themselves. That is our calling, and we do not shirk it.

Every newspaper has its angle, and we do not hide the fact that we have ours. Our commitment is to see Sri Lanka as a transparent, secular, liberal democracy. Think about those words, for they each has profound meaning. Transparent because government must be openly accountable to the people and never abuse their trust. Secular because in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society such as ours, secularism offers the only common ground by which we might all be united. Liberal because we recognise that all human beings are created different, and we need to accept others for what they are and not what we would like them to be. And democratic... well, if you need me to explain why that is important, you'd best stop buying this paper.

The Sunday Leader has never sought safety by unquestioningly articulating the majority view. Let's face it, that is the way to sell newspapers. On the contrary, as our opinion pieces over the years amply demonstrate, we often voice ideas that many people find distasteful. For example, we have consistently espoused the view that while separatist terrorism must be eradicated, it is more important to address the root causes of terrorism, and urged government to view Sri Lanka's ethnic strife in the context of history and not through the telescope of terrorism. We have also agitated against state terrorism in the so-called war against terror, and made no secret of our horror that Sri Lanka is the only country in the world routinely to bomb its own citizens. For these views we have been labelled traitors, and if this be treachery, we wear that label proudly.

Many people suspect that The Sunday Leader has a political agenda: it does not. If we appear more critical of the government than of the opposition it is only because we believe that - pray excuse cricketing argot - there is no point in bowling to the fielding side. Remember that for the few years of our existence in which the UNP was in office, we proved to be the biggest thorn in its flesh, exposing excess and corruption wherever it occurred. Indeed, the steady stream of embarrassing expos‚s we published may well have served to precipitate the downfall of that government.

Neither should our distaste for the war be interpreted to mean that we support the Tigers. The LTTE are among the most ruthless and bloodthirsty organisations ever to have infested the planet. There is no gainsaying that it must be eradicated. But to do so by violating the rights of Tamil citizens, bombing and shooting them mercilessly, is not only wrong but shames the Sinhalese, whose claim to be custodians of the dhamma is forever called into question by this savagery, much of which is unknown to the public because of censorship.

What is more, a military occupation of the country's north and east will require the Tamil people of those regions to live eternally as second-class citizens, deprived of all self respect. Do not imagine that you can placate them by showering "development" and "reconstruction" on them in the post-war era. The wounds of war will scar them forever, and you will also have an even more bitter and hateful Diaspora to contend with. A problem amenable to a political solution will thus become a festering wound that will yield strife for all eternity. If I seem angry and frustrated, it is only because most of my countrymen - and all of the government - cannot see this writing so plainly on the wall.

It is well known that I was on two occasions brutally assaulted, while on another my house was sprayed with machine-gun fire. Despite the government's sanctimonious assurances, there was never a serious police inquiry into the perpetrators of these attacks, and the attackers were never apprehended. In all these cases, I have reason to believe the attacks were inspired by the government. When finally I am killed, it will be the government that kills me.

The irony in this is that, unknown to most of the public, Mahinda and I have been friends for more than a quarter century. Indeed, I suspect that I am one of the few people remaining who routinely addresses him by his first name and uses the familiar Sinhala address oya when talking to him. Although I do not attend the meetings he periodically holds for newspaper editors, hardly a month passes when we do not meet, privately or with a few close friends present, late at night at President's House. There we swap yarns, discuss politics and joke about the good old days. A few remarks to him would therefore be in order here.

Mahinda, when you finally fought your way to the SLFP presidential nomination in 2005, nowhere were you welcomed more warmly than in this column. Indeed, we broke with a decade of tradition by referring to you throughout by your first name. So well known were your commitments to human rights and liberal values that we ushered you in like a breath of fresh air. Then, through an act of folly, you got yourself involved in the Helping Hambantota scandal. It was after a lot of soul-searching that we broke the story, at the same time urging you to return the money. By the time you did so several weeks later, a great blow had been struck to your reputation. It is one you are still trying to live down.

You have told me yourself that you were not greedy for the presidency. You did not have to hanker after it: it fell into your lap. You have told me that your sons are your greatest joy, and that you love spending time with them, leaving your brothers to operate the machinery of state. Now, it is clear to all who will see that that machinery has operated so well that my sons and daughter do not themselves have a father.

In the wake of my death I know you will make all the usual sanctimonious noises and call upon the police to hold a swift and thorough inquiry. But like all the inquiries you have ordered in the past, nothing will come of this one, too. For truth be told, we both know who will be behind my death, but dare not call his name. Not just my life, but yours too, depends on it.

Sadly, for all the dreams you had for our country in your younger days, in just three years you have reduced it to rubble. In the name of patriotism you have trampled on human rights, nurtured unbridled corruption and squandered public money like no other President before you. Indeed, your conduct has been like a small child suddenly let loose in a toyshop. That analogy is perhaps inapt because no child could have caused so much blood to be spilled on this land as you have, or trampled on the rights of its citizens as you do. Although you are now so drunk with power that you cannot see it, you will come to regret your sons having so rich an inheritance of blood. It can only bring tragedy. As for me, it is with a clear conscience that I go to meet my Maker. I wish, when your time finally comes, you could do the same. I wish.

As for me, I have the satisfaction of knowing that I walked tall and bowed to no man. And I have not travelled this journey alone. Fellow journalists in other branches of the media walked with me: most of them are now dead, imprisoned without trial or exiled in far-off lands. Others walk in the shadow of death that your Presidency has cast on the freedoms for which you once fought so hard. You will never be allowed to forget that my death took place under your watch. As anguished as I know you will be, I also know that you will have no choice but to protect my killers: you will see to it that the guilty one is never convicted. You have no choice. I feel sorry for you, and Shiranthi will have a long time to spend on her knees when next she goes for Confession for it is not just her owns sins which she must confess, but those of her extended family that keeps you in office.

As for the readers of The Sunday Leader, what can I say but Thank You for supporting our mission. We have espoused unpopular causes, stood up for those too feeble to stand up for themselves, locked horns with the high and mighty so swollen with power that they have forgotten their roots, exposed corruption and the waste of your hard-earned tax rupees, and made sure that whatever the propaganda of the day, you were allowed to hear a contrary view. For this I - and my family - have now paid the price that I have long known I will one day have to pay. I am - and have always been - ready for that. I have done nothing to prevent this outcome: no security, no precautions. I want my murderer to know that I am not a coward like he is, hiding behind human shields while condemning thousands of innocents to death. What am I among so many? It has long been written that my life would be taken, and by whom. All that remains to be written is when.

That The Sunday Leader will continue fighting the good fight, too, is written. For I did not fight this fight alone. Many more of us have to be - and will be - killed before The Leader is laid to rest. I hope my assassination will be seen not as a defeat of freedom but an inspiration for those who survive to step up their efforts. Indeed, I hope that it will help galvanise forces that will usher in a new era of human liberty in our beloved motherland. I also hope it will open the eyes of your President to the fact that however many are slaughtered in the name of patriotism, the human spirit will endure and flourish. Not all the Rajapakses combined can kill that.

People often ask me why I take such risks and tell me it is a matter of time before I am bumped off. Of course I know that: it is inevitable. But if we do not speak out now, there will be no one left to speak for those who cannot, whether they be ethnic minorities, the disadvantaged or the persecuted. An example that has inspired me throughout my career in journalism has been that of the German theologian, Martin Niem”ller. In his youth he was an anti-Semite and an admirer of Hitler. As Nazism took hold in Germany, however, he saw Nazism for what it was: it was not just the Jews Hitler sought to extirpate, it was just about anyone with an alternate point of view. Niem”ller spoke out, and for his trouble was incarcerated in the Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps from 1937 to 1945, and very nearly executed. While incarcerated, Niem”ller wrote a poem that, from the first time I read it in my teenage years, stuck hauntingly in my mind:

First they came for the Jews

and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists

and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists

and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak out for me.

If you remember nothing else, remember this: The Leader is there for you, be you Sinhalese, Tamil, Muslim, low-caste, homosexual, dissident or disabled. Its staff will fight on, unbowed and unafraid, with the courage to which you have become accustomed. Do not take that commitment for granted. Let there be no doubt that whatever sacrifices we journalists make, they are not made for our own glory or enrichment: they are made for you. Whether you deserve their sacrifice is another matter. As for me, God knows I tried.

2008-12-31T21:20:00.000-08:00

FBI "Cryptanalysis"

The FBI encourages us all to try our hand at cryptanalysis. Their cipher is as follows:

VFWTDLCSWV. YD NSLMIJFWEJFD GSW SL NIJNQBLM FOBV EJFDVF DLNIGTFBSL. KBVBF YYY.AHB.MSK/NSCDC.OFZ FS EDF WV QLSY SA GSWI VWNNDVV.

--

Spoiler alert:

The first thing that stands out is the website, YYY.AHB.MSK/etc. Because of the formatting, we can assume it's a simple substitution cipher, and see what happens (we're not wrong). What website might this be? WWW.FBI.GOV, perchance? I think yes. The sentence with the URL begins with KBVBF, which is probably a verb in reference to the URL. What can we do to URLs? Go to them? Not five letters. Visit them? I think yes, given: visit, kbvbf. Keep doing this for a few more minutes (or, be smart/lazy and write a quick decoder), and you'll get the finished product:

"Stupendous. We congratulate you on cracking this latest encryption. visit www.fbi.gov/coded.htm to let us know of your success." Where, presumably, they log your IP. Thanks, FBI. You make us feel important.

Cheers.

2008-12-28T22:04:00.001-08:00

Something we can agree on...

2008-12-15T20:28:00.000-08:00

What would John McCarthy say if he saw you programming?

2008-11-26T03:07:00.000-08:00

Very interesting. A group of ~25k individual (unconnected) rat neurons are hooked up to a bed of electrodes, learning how to fly via a virtual flight simulator. An excellent video.

2008-11-23T23:18:00.001-08:00

Once you love something, you lose all ability to understand it.

2008-11-17T01:07:00.000-08:00

The Wisdom of Gchat

Jata: there is a pile of papers about as tall as i am

Nora: nice

Jata: it frightens me

Nora: wait seriously? you have to take a picture

Nora: like a dogbert cartoon

Jata: yeah, it's... bad

Nora: no no

its epic

Jata: no, because it is all work i have not done yet

Nora: just think of the epic-ness

its all that matters

in the end

Jata: yeah, epic in the way hector facing achilleus was epic. awesome story, didn't work out so well for hector.

Nora: well achilleus didnt turn out so hot either

all you have to do is find your homework's acchille's heel

Jata: that'll do it.

logically, i have to die first. then it will be dragged in its death from the back of a horse... oh wait, that's ME.

(however, zeus did protect the body from defacement... hmmm)

(zeus? a little help here?)

Nora: he will rape you in animal form * whinnies from on high *

Jata: oh god

i prefer jesus

not that way zomg gah eww im sorry jesus im sorry forgive me?

Nora: * squeals *

imagine if jesus took on animal forms

Jata: and raped people?

Nora: no. but only humble, desert animals

like kangaroo rats

or armadillos

Jata: wow... that is so... i dont even know what to say

Nora: jesus snuffling in the sand

curling up in a little ball

whimpering slightly in the shadow of a cactus

teehehe

Jata: aww

::pets jesus::

Nora: jesus's hard, armadillo shell

a grub clinging to his tiny armadillo teeth

fear gods wrath...

Jata: armadillos = cute. armadillos that produce wine = profit.
Nora: omg that's our next project!
Jata: field trip! imagine if we find jesus the wine-making armadillo. we'd have a profitable prophet on our hands

2008-10-25T22:42:00.000-07:00

I believe that there are some things people do entirely for their own sake, without possibility of ulterior motive or obfuscated goal. For instance, I make small yet hilarious edits on Wikipedia -- an altered verb, a few letters here or there -- with the requirements that 1) the edit is in the article's introduction and 2) it drastically changes the entry's meaning (in the patently false direction).

I get too much satisfaction from every such sabotage surviving more than a year -- what does it say about the thousands of careful readers, and their thousands of edits since? What does it mean for their ontological and epistemic reality -- is there a certain lifespan, a minimum readership, that allows an untested conjecture to graduate to truth? Of course not. But someone, somewhere out there, believes.

These edits bring me a solitary sort of joy, which keeps me smiling long after most have gone to sleep. This joy is my own: I'm friends with several of the Wiki admins, so if I ever share the edits I made, they'll be fixed. If I ever explain the rules of my game, I won't be able to play. It is a joyful abstraction I can never share, except in the name of the anonymous. I do it for the lulz -- And the lulz are enough...