You could be seeing a great picture here
_

Charles on… anything that comes along

Friday 17 December 2004

Filed under: — Charles @ 6:43 pm

Wendy Grossman met a psychic called (something). He never stood a chance.

Update 17 Dec: This was a (failed) windup - she writes about it here.

One of Wendy M. Grossman’s unsung talents (besides writing interesting books about the Net and having an interesting column and those sorts of things) is her role with the Skeptic [sic] in the UK, and hence the semi-professional role of debunking so-called psychics. Debunking is the sort of thing that James Randi, the magician, has done so well; while he’s never called Uri Geller a fraud (and, honestly, who on earth would?), he has reproduced by magicians’ sleight-of-hand ever so many of the things Geller does using his unexplained powers - apart of course from appearing lascivious on the first I’m A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here!.

So Wendyg was asked by the BBC to appear as a sceptic (I prefer that spelling) on a program looking at spirituality: their plan was to do a sort of test today and then do something more comprehensive early next year. I don’t think they expected at all what actually happened. Certainly, I didn’t.

She was asked to write down five facts about herself and keep them secret. (Just pause, though, and consider how hard that is for someone whose life is so widely spread around the Net as Wendy’s; a bit of research and you’d think any would-be “psychic” could find out five things she might say about herself.) Then a psychic called “Shirley” (a man) would divine them, to stun and amaze everyone.

In the end she chose the following:

  • I have two old tennis balls in my dryer
  • I am currently reading Bodies in Motion and at Rest, by Thomas Lynch
  • My youngest friend is 19; my oldest friend is 73
  • Two of my teeth have crowns
  • I cannot draw

You’ll have to read the whole thing, which is well worth the journey, to see the amazing attempts that Shirley made to discomfort Wendy and justify his amazing “reading” of her facts. Let’s just say they diverged a little. He hardly did himself any favours by opening the conversation with her by saying that the word “skeptic” puts him in mind of “septic”. As anyone who knows Wendy could attest, this is as wise as dangling your arms in an industrial shredder.

Oh, OK, just a taster of the postcript: When I phoned Chris French afterwards — he’d also been filmed in a discussion with Shirley a few hours earlier — his experience was similar (without the test), although instead of suggesting incontinence he suggested adultery (’Names!’ said Chris. ‘I want details!’). I have no idea whether they’ll be able to use any of it.

Filed under: — Charles @ 6:21 pm

Update on Dashboard and security risk: why should Dashboard code have root privileges?

Just to return to this topic briefly… back in July, Dave Hyatt (head developer for Safari/Webkit, the HTML rendering engine on OSX) wrote about what a Dashboard widget in Tiger will need: A Dashboard widget is a bundle that contains a principal HTML file and any supporting code that the widget requires (be it CSS, JS, images, or native code). A widget can add an optional interface to native code, written in Objective-C, that can be bound into JavaScript and made accessible from the HTML document’s JS window object.

(Bear with me. We’ll get there.)

Anyway, some points about this model.
(1) The native plugin code must be owned by root. This means that in order for a Dashboard widget that contains one of these special types of plugins to execute that code, you have to enter a root account password (to chown the plugin code). This plugin code cannot execute, therefore, without the widget being ‘blessed’ just as an application that you might install on your system must be.

That’s the bit which worries me: the Javascript being owned by root, the super-super-user on an OSX (or any *nix) machine. I really hope wiser heads have since prevailed and that in the finished product there’s a special user called , say, “dashboard” (just as there are special invisible users called “mysql” and “www” and “postfix” on OSX machines already, for the open-source database and the web server and mail program) which has not unlimited authority to do things on your machine. Else this could get ugly.

Filed under: — Charles @ 6:20 pm

The shields go up: I’ve banned access from spam-ridden territories

Having mentioned before that I would, I (or the web admin) have put in a block that prevents access from all of Latin America, and most of the Asia-Pacific areas (except nice ISPs in Australia, New Zealand and Indonesia where some readers drop by).

Unfortunately I also accidentally included the “62.x.x.x” grouping in those to block, which means a lot of Europe. Oops. I’m trying to get it changed back.

Why did I do it? To reduce the bombardment of comment spam. Yes, that’s collateral damage. Curses.

Powered by WordPress