Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Atari Online News, Etc. Volume 12 Issue 45
Volume 12, Issue 45 Atari Online News, Etc. November 5, 2010
Published and Copyright (c) 1999 - 2010
All Rights Reserved
Atari Online News, Etc.
A-ONE Online Magazine
Dana P. Jacobson, Publisher/Managing Editor
Joseph Mirando, Managing Editor
Rob Mahlert, Associate Editor
Atari Online News, Etc. Staff
Dana P. Jacobson -- Editor
Joe Mirando -- "People Are Talking"
Michael Burkley -- "Unabashed Atariophile"
Albert Dayes -- "CC: Classic Chips"
Rob Mahlert -- Web site
Thomas J. Andrews -- "Keeper of the Flame"
With Contributions by:
Fred Horvat
To subscribe to A-ONE, change e-mail addresses, or unsubscribe,
log on to our website at: www.atarinews.org
and click on "Subscriptions".
OR subscribe to A-ONE by sending a message to: dpj@atarinews.org
and your address will be added to the distribution list.
To unsubscribe from A-ONE, send the following: Unsubscribe A-ONE
Please make sure that you include the same address that you used to
subscribe from.
To download A-ONE, set your browser bookmarks to one of the
following sites:
http://people.delphiforums.com/dpj/a-one.htm
Now available:
http://www.atarinews.org
Visit the Atari Advantage Forum on Delphi!
http://forums.delphiforums.com/atari/
=~=~=~=
A-ONE #1245 11/05/10
~ Europe Tests Defenses! ~ People Are Talking! ~ The Kinect System!
~ Right To Be Forgotten! ~ MacBook Air Problems! ~ Invest in the Amiga!
~ Popular Facebook Pols! ~ Creative's New Tablets ~ OpenOffice Exodus!
~ OLPC Tablet Is Delayed ~ Buzz Suit Settlement! ~ New IE Zero-Day Woe!
-* Military Ready for Cyber War *-
-* Blekko: New Search Engine Launches! *-
-* Supreme Court Gets Videogame Violence Case *-
=~=~=~=
->From the Editor's Keyboard "Saying it like it is!"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Finally, another mid-term election is over but the licking of the
wounds incurred by the Democrats. That is, unless you happen to live
in Massachusetts. Here, the "Scott Brown Syndrome" didn't seem to take
hold two elections in a row! Even the plethora of negative campaigns
didn't seem to take its toll like it did everywhere else in the country.
One thing is definitely certain today, and that is the people in this
country are fed up with how things are going - and politicians are feeling
that wrath. Unless things drastically turn around positively over the
next couple of years, you can be sure that we're going to see even more
of a political backlash in the next election.
Frankly, I don't see how things are going to improve much over the next
couple of years in Washington, especially with the GOP in charge in the
House. I think that we're going to see and overwhelming landslide
victory for the Republicans in 2012, much like was witnessed in the
McGovern debacle a few decades ago. I can almost imagine a similar GOP
victory, with me once again being able to join my fellow Commonwealth
citizenry chanting "Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts!" (the only
state that McGovern won in that election!).
Anyway, now that the elections are over, we can focus our attention on
the rapidly-approaching Thanksgiving holiday! More than likely, my wife
and I will be at home this year, by ourselves, celebrating the feast. I
don't have a problem with that, for the most part, and look forward to the
preparations and enjoying of the turkey and all of the fixings. Only a
couple of weeks away!
Don't forget to turn your clocks back this weekend, and enjoy that extra
hour of sleep! The sad part of all this is losing that extra hour of
daylight - a sure sigh that winter isn't that far off!
Until next time...
=~=~=~=
Pluritas: Engaged by Amiga, Inc. to Market the
Global IP Rights to the Iconic Amiga Computer Brand
Pluritas, LLC, a leading IP transaction advisory firm, is currently
accepting offers to acquire the worldwide rights to the AMIGA trademarks
and associated intellectual property.
The Amiga computer, launched by Commodore International in 1985, was
acclaimed for combining superior multimedia technology with ease of use,
creating millions of loyal customers throughout the world. The Amiga
community thrives today and has been awaiting the return of the brand
that helped revolutionize the computer and gaming industry. The Amiga
computer was recently voted the 7th greatest computer and the 37th
best tech product of all-time by PC World.
Amiga Inc., who is also actively seeking investment capital to fund the
ongoing development of their enabling technologies, holds the
intellectual property related to the AMIGA personal computer that was
developed and sold by Commodore International and Amiga Corporation,
including hardware designs, software, operating systems, trademarks, and
other intellectual properties. Bill McEwen, CEO of Amiga states that "we
are very excited to be working with Pluritas as Amiga has developed a
platform in which a strategic buyer or investor can launch new products
and technologies that are game changers for the consumer and industry."
Key investment considerations:
* Globally recognized and revered brand with an active user base and
following;
* Unique cult status with developer and artistic/animation community
but with mainstream, mass market brand appeal;
* Trademark coverage in over 100 countries, including China, Taiwan,
Japan, Korea as well as North American and Europe;
* Amiga has significant brand awareness whereas a new brand or new
company would have to spend significant marketing dollars to
achieve these levels of awareness today;
* Amiga has "master brand" potential and can be extended over
products and services related to the computer, technology, and
gaming categories;
* Due to its historic roots in innovation, the brand can be married
with current and cutting edge technology.
Interested parties may request additional information concerning the
sale by contacting Pluritas at:
Pluritas Main Office: 415-354-1760
Mark Thomann - extension 107 -- email: mark@pluritas.com
Robert Aronoff - extension 101 -- email: rob@pluritas.com
=~=~=~=
PEOPLE ARE TALKING
compiled by Joe Mirando
joe@atarinews.org
Hidi ho friends and neighbors. First off, if you're reading this as A-ONE
"hits the streets", and if you're in a locality that observes it, we
abandon Daylight Savings Time this weekend and return to Standard Time.
This means that you'll have an extra hour to sleep on Sunday morning, but
it also means that it'll be getting dark an hour earlier. That is, of
course, if you're in the northern hemisphere.
I don't know about you, but the idea of having that extra hour to sleep
has never quite counterbalanced the idea of it being dark outside at
5:00pm. But like it or not, that's what we're faced with.
I'll never forget the time a co-worker messed up and turned his clock
ahead instead of back and got to work two hours late, unable to understand
why he was catching hell. Yeah, he never was the sharpest knife in the
drawer.
Another feature of this time of year is, of course (if you're in the
United States), the elections. I don't know how you feel about it, but
this campaign season seemed a horrible one to me. I can count the number
of positive campaign ads I've seen on one hand. As a matter of fact, at
two fingered man could do it.
What disappoints me the most is that "my guy", the one I wanted to see as
my state's governor, did it too. To be 'fair', his opponent put out more,
'dirtier' negative ads, but that's hardly relevant to me. When I saw the
first negative ad from "my guy", I did a little research. What was said in
the ad COULD be considered true, but only from a certain, very narrow
perspective, and only with massive assumptions, a large dose of
misinterpretation and careful selection of language.
I was very disheartened and emailed the campaign to say so. I guess the
problem is that once one side puts out a negative ad, the only response
that will get the voters' attention is, "Oh yeah? Well he/she <fill in the
blank>".
I don't agree with the philosophy, and I don't like the practice from
anyone, but the fact remains that negative ads are used for one reason and
one reason only: They work.
It seems that when we hear a negative ad, we think "That's terrible! If
he/she could do something like THAT..." without stopping to think about
whether its even true or not, or where we might go to check it out.
I guess that we never get to that point, and just remember the bad stuff
that gets said. The really defeating part of this is that when you have
both sides putting out negative ads, people end up picking the one they
would have picked anyway. The bottom line? People believe what they want
to believe and always find some way to justify it.
I can remember back to the 2000 election. Remember when both sides
misrepresented the other not in a bid to make themselves look better but
to make the other guy look worse? Well, back then there WERE ads also
saying "Yeah but look at the things I HAVE done".
Then came the 2004 election when ALL rules went out the window and
candidates (and I'm not talking about just the presidential candidates
here) focused on negativity toward their opponents. Again, negative ads
won out. So the die was cast and it set the stage for the 2008 election.
More of the same, with the addition of "Yes We Can". I had hoped that this
simple rallying cry would help to bring things around again, but then came
this campaign season and "Yes We Can" was replaced with either "But You
Didn't" or "But The Other Guys Wouldn't Let Us".
While the republicans have "taken over" the House of Representatives" and
should be happy about having some power to compensate their obvious
feelings of inadequacy in other areas, they're already showing that they
intend to stick to their obstructionism, switching only from "but you're
not paying attention to us" to "we don't have to pay attention to you".
I try, most of the time, to avoid interjecting my personal feelings into
discussions like this... once in a while I even succeed... but I've got to
make one statement here. I think it was a mistake for the President to
"waste" the time he did on trying to create a bipartisan atmosphere for as
long as he did. I'm not saying he should have been obstructionist, but it
probably would have been more effective in the short term and made no
difference in the long term if he'd given it a try, said "okay, you've had
your chance to join in" and then pushed through the things he had to. And
yes, I'm talking about "Obamacare" and the stimulus package.
Good, bad or indifferent, the stimulus program did make some progress. If
it's guilty of anything, it's of not having done enough. I'll go back
almost 70 years here... When FDR instituted massive work programs. They
were, for the time, unbelievably expensive. And every time Congress
complained and cut things back, the economy faltered and sagged again. It
wasn't until he "kept the money flowing" that we saw recovery. And even
then, it unfortunately took World War II to push us out of the hole once
and for all.
NOW, we find ourselves IN two wars. Iraq and Afghanistan. We are not
rushing to build battleships like we did back then, and the money spent on
the things we DO build seems to benefit few other than the management of a
handful of companies and their stock holders. Do we see huge fits of
hiring, putting people to work? Defense plants? No.
The best thing we could do right now is to finish our mission in that part
of the world, and then use some of the money we've been spending on those
wars on infrastructure. The thing about "infrastructure" is that we need
it. We're going to need it anyway. And the longer we wait, the more
expensive it's going to get.
Think about a country without the interstate highway system. But that's
only the start. We HAVE an interstate highway system. But it needs
maintenance and repair. Yes, it's money spent by the government, and its
our money, but the highway system benefits us all.
The same is true of the "digital" infrastructure. I'm not saying that the
government should take over the internet, but funding projects is one way
to assure us of a solid, secure digital data network, whether that may be
for cell phones or for internet access, we need to repair and maintain
this as well.
And then, probably most importantly, there is another "infrastructure" we
should do some work on, and quickly... the electrical infrastructure. Our
"grid" has been do for massive work for decades. The issues with it are
difficult ones to deal with, but they are important, verging on critical.
"The grid" is, in many areas, at the limit of what it can do, which means
that it needs to be upgraded or modified or expanded, and in some areas its
in need of repair and maintenance.
Yes, it's a big job. Yes, it probably will take years and will range from
one side of the country to the other. But it needs to be done. And it's
better done now than later, and NOW is when people need work. Heck,
unemployment is still too darned close to ten percent. Put people to work
for these things, and the economy will start moving again. To quote Oscar
Goldman, better, faster, stronger.
Well on that note, I'm going to leave you 'till next week. Be sure to tune
in next week, same time, same station, and be ready to listen to what they
are saying when...
PEOPLE ARE TALKING
=~=~=~=
->In This Week's Gaming Section - Kinect Motion-Sensing System!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Supreme Court Hears Violence!
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE's Game Console Industry News - The Latest Gaming News!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Kinect Motion-Sensing System Impresses
There are a lot of futuristic things we're still waiting on: jet packs
for the entire family, self-driving cars and time-travel, to name a few.
But one new, pretty darn amazing bit of technology has finally come to
fruition, thanks to the folks at Microsoft.
The Kinect system, on sale beginning Thursday for the Xbox 360 game
console, offers controller-free control of living room entertainment and
aptly delivers a groundbreaking piece of technology.
It's part game controller, part fitness guru and part "Minority Report,"
the movie where Tom Cruise famously interacts with a multi-touch
interface by making rapid motions with his hands. Instead of gripping a
physical controller to play games and movies on your Xbox 360, Kinect
allows you to simply move your body - hands, feet, hips - to do everything.
Kinect is a hybrid video camera and motion sensor that sits just above
or below your television display. It looks like an extra wide webcam and
connects to the Xbox 360 - even older models - through the USB port.
Kinect sells for $150 and comes with one game; you can buy it bundled
with a low-end Xbox 360 for $300, saving $50 on the package.
Activating and configuring Kinect was easy enough, though it does
require a system update.
Kinect calibrated itself by testing the ambient light in my room, the
background noise and my own voice. Kinect then asked me to get used to
performing my moves in a fairly large rectangular space about 8 feet in
front of the television.
The 46-inch LCD display from Sceptre I used for my tests delivered the
Kinect experience in tack-sharp high-definition. A larger-than-average
display is ideal because it'll help you see the various digital versions
of yourself more clearly, as captured by Kinect's camera and
motion-sensing voodoo.
At the Xbox 360 main menu screen, a small dark box appeared at the lower
right corner. Inside was a live view of my body, with my hands glowing
at my sides. A quick wave of my right hand told Kinect I was ready to
interact.
To select items on most menu screens, I simply held up my right hand at
about shoulder height and guided an on-screen hand to an icon or word.
In games, similar control takes place to select people and objects.
Simply hover and grab.
Kinect also brings voice control to the Xbox 360, and you can launch
movies and social media apps by saying something like "Xbox. Play." I
had spotty success with that and found the hand guide technique more
dependable.
The game that comes with Kinect is "Kinect Adventures," an outdoorsy
jaunt into the world of whitewater rapids and antigravity. As I stood in
front of my TV, I looked at my avatar's back, careening down a rushing
river in an inflatable raft. As I instinctively stepped and leaned to
the left, my character on-screen did so as well, steering the raft
around rocks and obstacles.
In "Space Pop," I floated in a low-gravity room and waved my arms and
legs to pop bubbles for points. These games were fine for a warm-up, but
I was quickly ready for a more stern test.
The Kinect games now available all require the system to play them. Your
physical Xbox 360 controller won't suffice. There will be
Kinect-enhanced games available later that can be played both ways, but
Microsoft Corp. says Kinect will give you a better experience.
I met my match with "Dance Central" ($50, MTV Games, rated "T"). This
top-shelf title is essential for Kinect users. I mimicked the on-screen
character's dance moves for high scores. I jumped and gyrated to songs
from top artists such as Lady Gaga and Audio Push. I learned the moves
individually, with a few restarts, then launched into a dance battle to
string them together to the music.
A circle beneath my on-screen feet glowed green when I hit the moves
correctly. It glowed red when I muffed the moves, indicating I had
suddenly sprouted at least two left feet, if not more. The music on this
title is fresh, and additional tracks can be purchased through the Xbox
Live Marketplace.
One title that was a dud for me was "Kinect Joy Ride," a cartoonish
driving game. Driving is one of those game genres that begs for a
physical controller. I had trouble keeping my hands in an imaginary grip
on an imaginary steering wheel to control my imaginary car. I crashed
because I overcorrected my steering. My hands moved too freely because
they weren't really holding on to anything.
My wife had better luck when I raced against her. She even found time to
lean over and answer a real-world cell phone call while "driving,"
gently cradling the phone on her shoulder while gripping her nonexistent
steering wheel.
There is one title that literally left me breathless, but for all the
right reasons. "Your Shape: Fitness Evolved" is a masterpiece. The
exercise game talks and walks you through precise movements to improve
your cardio and work out your muscles.
I began by standing in front of my TV and letting Kinect measure my body
size and structure. I then used a hand-motion menu to enter my age,
weight and exercise habits so the game would learn not to overexert me
too soon.
Within minutes I was following along with the Tai chi and yoga moves of
an on-screen instructor, with my on-screen mat placed just behind and to
the right of her. She led me through the movements, and at the end of
each routine I was given a score for my performance, based on how well I
stayed in rhythm and mimicked her deep knee bends.
I would have never thought that the most impressive game title for
Microsoft's foray into motion-sensor gaming would involve me invoking
the phrase "Namaste" instead of "activate plasma rifle."
Motion-sensor gaming has now hit all three major gaming platforms.
Nintendo Co.'s Wii arrived first. Sony Corp.'s Move for PlayStation 3
added more realistic games, graphics and highly acute player control.
Microsoft Kinect may lack the fine character control of the Move, but it
adds the promise of an expanded breadth of activities in front of the
gaming console. The possibilities for Kinect are rich, and I will
forever more feel a touch guilty while sitting in that well-worn corner
of my couch to play a video game.
Four stars out of four.
Court Hears Arguments on Violent Video Games
The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed sympathy for a California law that
aims to keep children from buying ultra-violent video games in which
players maim, kill or sexually assault images of people.
But justices seemed closely split on whether the restrictions are
constitutional.
The high court has been reluctant to carve out exceptions to the First
Amendment, striking down a ban on videos showing graphic violence to
animals earlier this year.
California officials argue that they should be allowed to limit minors'
ability to pick up violent video games on their own at retailers because
of the purported damage they cause to the mental development of
children. Some justices appeared to agree.
"We do not have a tradition in this country of telling children they
should watch people actively hitting schoolgirls over the head with a
shovel so they'll beg with mercy, being merciless and decapitating them,
shooting people in the leg so they fall down," Chief Justice John
Roberts said.
Roberts decried that one game lets a player "pour gasoline over them,
set them on fire and urinate on them." "We protect children from that,"
he said. "We don't actively expose them to that."
California's 2005 law would prohibit anyone under 18 from buying or
renting games that give players the option of "killing, maiming,
dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being." Parents
would be able to buy the games for their children, but retailers who
sell directly to minors would face fines of up to $1,000 for each game
sold.
That means that children would need an adult to get games like "Postal
2," the first-person shooter by developer Running With Scissors that
features the ability to light unarmed bystanders on fire. It would also
apply to the popular "Grand Theft Auto IV," a third-person shoot-'em-up
from Rockstar Games that allows gamers to portray carjacking, gun-toting
gangsters.
Some Supreme Court justices wondered where the regulation would stop if
they allowed California's law to go forward.
"What about films?" asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "What about comic
books?"
Justice Antonin Scalia wondered if movies showing drinking and smoking
might be next.
"I am concerned with the First Amendment, which says Congress shall make
no law abridging the freedom of speech," he said. "It has never been
understood that the freedom of speech did not include portrayals of
violence. You are asking us to create a whole new prohibition which the
American people never ratified when they ratified the First Amendment."
The California law never took effect. Lower courts have said the law
violates minors' constitutional rights under the First and Fourteenth
amendments, and that the state lacked enough evidence to prove that
violent games cause physical and psychological harm to minors. Courts in
six other states, including Michigan and Illinois, reached similar
conclusions, striking down similar bans.
The Supreme Court will make a decision sometime next year.
California lawmakers were trying to help parents control what type of
video games their children had access to, said Zackery P. Morazzini, a
California supervisory deputy attorney general who argued the case for
the state.
But a lawyer for the Entertainment Merchants Association said that there
was no proof that violent video games were any more harmful than
television, books or movies. "We have a history in this country of new
mediums coming along and people vastly overreacting to them, thinking
the sky is falling, our children are all going to be turned into
criminals," Paul M. Smith said.
Roberts appeared to disagree.
"In these video games the child is not sitting there passively watching
something. The child is doing the killing. The child is doing the
maiming. And I suppose that might be understood to have a different
impact on the child's moral development," Roberts said.
The case appeared to divide the court's conservative members, with
Justices Scalia and Samuel Alito engaging in a spirited discussion about
the original meaning of the Constitution.
"I think what Justice Scalia wants to know is what James Madison thought
about video games," Alito said to laughter in the courtroom.
"No, I want to know what James Madison thought about violence," Scalia
retorted.
Showing stronger support for the law, Justice Stephen Breyer said it
doesn't make sense to allow bans on minors accessing pornography and not
be able to block them from graphically violent video games.
What if a video game showed "gratuitous torture of children?" Breyer
asked. "'Now you can't buy a naked woman, but you can go and buy that,'
you say to the 13-year-old. Now what sense is there to that?"
"Why isn't it common sense to say a state has the right to say, 'Parent,
you want this for your child? You go buy it yourself,'" Breyer added.
The case also provoked debate among the court's more liberal members.
Justice Elena Kagan pointed out that many of the younger staff at the
Supreme Court probably grew up playing versions of the video game
"Mortal Kombat," a martial arts fighting game that allows victorious
players to finish their opponents with graphically violent moves called
"fatalities."
And nearing the end of arguments, Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out
the difficulties with enforcement.
She noted that the law bans minors buying video games that show violence
to people. But what if game designers make a couple of anatomical
changes to the depiction of human beings, like elongating the ears?
"Would a video game that portrayed a Vulcan as opposed to a human being,
being maimed and tortured, would that be covered by the act?" Sotomayor
asked.
Morazzini said those games would then be legal to sell to children.
Roberts suggested that the court might find a compromise like it did
with "crush videos" showing animal deaths. He said the court struck down
that ban in a way so that a new, narrower law might be legal.
"Why isn't that a good approach here?" Roberts asked.
___
The case is Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 08-1448.
Violent Video Game Ban Could Set Dangerous Precedent
Thank God Steve Jobs isn't on the Supreme Court.
Our nation's highest justices, you see, are in the midst of debating a
case about violent video games. They're trying to determine whether the
government has the right to decide which video games minors should and
shouldn't be allowed to buy. In other words, they're trying to determine
whether centuries-old guidelines about free speech still apply to modern
forms of media like Playstations and Xboxes.
Their decision, needless to say, could have serious implications on the
future of First Amendment rights. And I think we can all imagine how
Steve Jobs would vote.
The Supreme Court case revolves around a California law passed in 2005.
The law makes it illegal for anyone to sell a video game deemed as
"violent" to a minor. Breaking it would result in a fine of a thousand
dollars per violation.
Thanks to legal challenges, the law has never actually gone into effect.
And now, its fate rests in the hands of the high court justices.
We can only hope that the U.S. Supreme Court agrees with the federal
courts that have struck down this law in the past. It isn't even limited
to California; similar laws have been enacted in eight states overall,
according to NPR, and have been deemed unconstitutional by federal judges
in each instance. It's no small coincidence.
Let me be clear about one thing: I rarely play video games - and I'm
certainly not a minor - but I have every reason to be concerned about
this decision. And so do you.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court case comes down to the divisive question
of how much the government should "protect" us from "offensive" materials.
Consider this: The video game industry has already established a ratings
system similar to what we see with movies. If anything, it may be even more
effective than its film-based cousin: A 2009 Federal Trade Commission
report found only 20 percent of minors were able to purchase "mature"-rated
video games, compared to 28 percent that were able to buy tickets to
R-rated movies. Does the government really need to intervene and get
involved? Isn't this system - not to mention that silly ol' thing called
parental supervision - sufficient enough?
Principles aside, the violent video game law poses plenty of practical
challenges. According to the law's wording, a violent video game would
be defined as one "in which the range of options available to a player
includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image
of a human being" in a manner that's "patently offensive," appeals to a
person's "deviant or morbid interests," and lacks "serious literary,
artistic, political, or scientific value."
So who's going to make the call as to which video games are "patently
offensive" and which aren't? Or, as Justice Antonin Scalia asked during the
arguments, "What's a 'deviant' violent video game? As opposed to what - a
'normal' violent video game?"
Like with Apple's arbitrary App Store approval system, we're looking at a
purely subjective judgment. Unlike Apple's little world, however, this is
the real government we're dealing with here - and granting this type of
power is a dangerous precedent to set.
"If you are supposing a category of violent materials dangerous to
children, then how do you cut it off at video games? What about films?
What about comic books?" asked U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg.
Supporters of the California video game law counter that argument with the
notion that this scenario is different; because players are actively
involved, they say, the violent acts are more damaging to their minds than
the graphic violence in movies and on TV. They've even dug up some studies
that suggest playing violent video games "increases aggressive thought and
behavior" and "engenders poor school performance" in minors. Those studies,
of course, conveniently make the mistake of assuming causation from
correlation - just because some kids who play video games also have
behavioral problems doesn't mean that the video games caused those
problems - but hey, it's far easier to jump to that conclusion than to
search for a real explanation.
Here's the kicker: Even if you accept the "video games are different"
argument, opening the door to government-controlled content regulation is
asking for trouble. Do we want to make the First Amendment a
medium-specific form of protection? If evil, mind-warping video games
warrant special consideration, what other modern media will need supervision
next? Surely our smartphone app markets should be regulated too, right?
There's an awful lot of interactive material there that we need to be
protected from - just ask you-know-who. If this law is green-lighted, we'd
better brace ourselves for an awful lot of asterisks under America's "free
speech" header.
Finally, with government-enforced fines on selling violent video games,
how long will it be until the gaming industry itself starts to change?
Forbes.com blogger Paul Tassi raises an interesting point:
"If video games are equated with pornography and it becomes a crime to
sell them to minors, 'family-friendly' retailers might change their
store policies and someone like Wal-Mart might ban all these games from
their shelves entirely. This would in turn cause developers to tone down
the violence in their titles to make sure that every outlet will sell
them."
All factors considered, the outcome of this case is extremely consequential.
When real world policies start to resemble those of Steve Jobs' world,
there is definite cause for concern.
ESA: California Failed to Prove Argument in 'Violent Video Games' Case
I'm just off a conference call with Entertainment Software Association CEO
Michael Gallagher in which he and others discussed how things went during
today's arguments before the Supreme Court. The case, as you've probably
heard, involves a California law passed in 2005 - twice ruled
unconstitutional by lower courts - that bans the sale of what it describes
as "violent video games" to minors, and fines stores that do so anyway
$1,000 per incident.
Gallagher was upbeat about the court's reaction to the ESA's position
and read it as combative toward the law's proponents due to vague
definitions and suspect research claims that violent video games cause
deviant behavior in minors.
"Today was a historic day, not only for the computer and video game
industry, but for the First Amendment," said Gallagher. "12 times in
eight years we've had this issue raised about whether video games are
speech, and if so, to what degree of protection are they entitled to,
and I think that the court today, you heard every single argument that
the industry has made articulated not just by Paul [Smith of Jenner
Block, the ESA's advocate before the court]...but by the justices
themselves."
Gallagher then outlined what the ESA views as the legal tests both the
law and California's counsel before the court failed to pass.
"The state law, such as what California passed to restrict speech, in
this case for video games, are subject to strict scrutiny," said
Gallagher. "That requires that they demonstrate a compelling public
interest that's served by proposed law, and that the proposed law is the
least restrictive means of achieving the intended goal."
"In our view, the argument this morning doesn't change our conclusion
that the state of California has not proven either a compelling
government interest, or that they've established that the means they're
proposing are the least restrictive."
Turning to the question of research cited by the California law that
argues "violent video games" cause deviant behavior in minors, Gallagher
thinks the justices weren't buying it.
"In particular, we're very...we thought it was very clear to a number of
the justices that 82 social scientists have filed a legal brief with the
court urging it to reject California's law because it's...as they quote,
it has not produced substantial evidence that violent games cause
psychological or neurological harm to children."
Besides, said Gallagher, "when you look at the least restrictive means
component, the Entertainment Software Rating Board is a proven system
that parents rely upon."
Gallagher's certainly not wrong about that. According to a 2009 Peter D.
Hart Research Associates study, nearly 90% of American parents with
children who play games are aware of the ESRB's ratings and use them.
=~=~=~=
A-ONE's Headline News
The Latest in Computer Technology News
Compiled by: Dana P. Jacobson
Military Ready for War in Cyberspace
The military's new Cyber Command, responsible for shielding 15,000 military
computer networks from intruders, has become fully operational, the Defense
Department said on Wednesday.
More than 100 foreign intelligence organizations are trying to break
into U.S. networks, Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn wrote in the
September/October issue of the journal Foreign Affairs. Some already
have the capacity to disrupt U.S. information infrastructure, he said.
Gates ordered the new unit's creation in June 2009 to address the
growing threat of cyber-attack.
It consolidates offensive and defensive operations under Army General
Keith Alexander, who also heads the National Security Agency, the
Defense Department's intelligence arm that protects national security
information and intercepts foreign communications.
"Cyberspace is essential to our way of life and U.S. Cyber Command
synchronizes our efforts in the defense of (Defense Department)
networks," Alexander said in the Pentagon announcement.
Lynn declared the unit, based at Fort Meade, Maryland, fully up and
running in a memorandum dated October 31, said Colonel Rivers Johnson, a
Cyber Command spokesman.
The new unit began work in May, establishing a joint operations center
and transitioning personnel and functions from the old structures.
It is part of the Offutt Air Force, Nebraska-based Strategic Command,
the organization responsible for U.S. nuclear and space operations as
well as information warfare and global military intelligence.
Europe Tests Cyber Defences Against Hackers
European computer guards battled Thursday against a simulated attempt by
hackers to bring down critical Internet services in the first
pan-continental test of cyber defences.
All 27 of the European Union's member nations as well as Iceland, Norway
and Switzerland took part in the simulation as participants or
observers, working together against the fictitious online assault, the
European Commission said.
The exercise was based on a scenario in which one country after the
other increasingly suffered problems accessing the Internet, making it
difficult for citizens, businesses and public institutions to access
essential services.
Security experts had to work together to prevent a simulated "total
network crash," said Jonathan Todd, a commission spokesman for digital
affairs.
"I would like to emphasise, so as to avoid any 'War of the Worlds'
scenario here, this is purely an exercise and practice," Todd told a
news briefing.
"There will be absolutely no effect on Internet connectivity in Europe."
The threat of assaults on computer systems has been identified as a key
challenge in Europe, the United States, and NATO.
The threat came to life in a costly cyber strike against Estonia in 2007
and the Stuxnet computer worm attack in Iran this year.
The United States held its own major exercise against a large-scale
cyber attack on critical infrastructure in late September with 12
international partners and 60 private companies.
The European exercise will be followed by more tests with more complex
scenarios on the global level, the EU's executive arm said.
The EU hopes the exercise will help the bloc understand how such an
incident can take place and ensure that authorities know who to contact
in other members states in any cyber strikes, the commission said.
"This exercise to test Europe's preparedness against cyber threats is an
important first step towards working together to combat potential online
threats to essential infrastructure and ensuring citizens and businesses
feel safe and secure online," said European technology commissioner
Neelie Kroes.
The European Commission proposed on September 30 a new regulation that
would impose heavier criminal sanctions against hackers and producers of
malicious software.
Cyber security will be one of the top issues that NATO leaders will
tackle at a summit of the 28-nation military alliance in Lisbon on
November 20-29.
During a visit to Brussels in mid-September, US Deputy Defense Secretary
William Lynn urged NATO allies to build a "cyber shield" against the
treat of computer attacks.
Warning that military assets were not the only targets of cyber strikes,
he underscored the need to protect the computer systems of vital
economic infrastructure such as power grids and financial markets.
EU Wants To Give People Power To Vanish from Internet
Europe's justice chief Viviane Reding called Thursday for new rules to give
citizens more control of their online personal data, with the "right to be
forgotten" from Facebook or Google.
Reding unveiled proposals to update a European Union rule on data protection
that dates back to 1995, years before the proliferation of social networking
websites and web search engines.
"The protection of personal data is a fundamental right," the European
justice commissioner said.
"To guarantee this right, we need clear and consistent data protection
rules. We also need to bring our laws up to date with the challenges
raised by new technologies and globalisation," she said.
Her services want people to reclaim ownership of their digital imprint,
including photographs, in an age when many users complain it is
virtually impossible to avoid a permanent trace being left on mainframe
computer servers the world over.
"People should be able to give their informed consent to the processing
of their personal data, for example when surfing online, and should have
the 'right to be forgotten' when their data is no longer needed or they
want their data to be deleted," the European Commission said.
There are growing fears about Facebook's influence on people's careers
and social and private lives, including failed job interviews and
divorces, with cases of "Facebook suicide" increasing.
The commission launched a two-month public consultation on its proposals
with the aim of drafting legislation in 2011.
The EU executive wants to limit the collection and use of personal data
to the strict minimum necessary.
"Individuals should also be clearly informed in a transparent way on
how, why, by whom, and for how long their data is collected and used,"
the commission said.
The commission also wants to revise rules on protecting data in the
police and criminal justice sphere and ensure a high level of protection
for information shared beyond EU borders.
The European consumer rights group BEUC welcomed the proposals, saying:
"Online business practices do not always respect the current data
protection directive requirements and such breaches fuel a lack of
consumer confidence."
"The commission has planted the flag showing that the consumer's right
to privacy should not be undermined merely because it has become easier
and more profitable to break it in the virtual world," said BEUC
director general Monique Goyens.
The Association for Competitive Technology, an industry group
representing nearly 3,000 computer firms, said the proposals were a
chance to fix a "patchwork of laws" that "hinders our potential to
develop services for the entire European Union."
"The lack of harmonisation of data protection rules creates enormous
challenges for entrepreneurs who are trying to use emerging technologies
to expand into new markets," said ACT president Jonathan Zuck.
New Internet Search Engine Launches: Blekko
Challengers to Google have come and gone but another startup is stepping up
to try to make its mark in Internet search.
The latest Web search engine is Blekko.com, which launched a beta, or test,
product on Monday backed by millions in venture capital.
"When we started this company our goal was to build a search engine that
not only let you do your usual searches but also lets you do searches
that you just can't do anywhere else," Blekko chief executive Rich
Skrenta said.
Blekko employs a feature it calls "slashtags" to allow users to narrow
down their searches to only the most trusted and most relevant sites,
cutting out spam sites and sites of poor quality.
"A slashtag is a tool to filter search results," Blekko said. "Rather
than searching the entire Web, a slashtag allows you to search just the
sites you want searched."
Skrenta said Blekko produces the most relevant results by allowing users
to create slashtags that create lists of recommended sites.
"Not everyone has to participate for the model to work - most people
don't edit Wikipedia, yet we have a vast encyclopedia which long ago
dwarfed the closed Britannica," he said.
"But a small fraction of the Web audience that does get involved can
help make the search experience better for everyone else," he said.
Blekko also pledged full transparency with its search ranking data,
showing how it ranks sites for any particular query.
Danny Sullivan, editor-in-chief of technology blog SearchEngineLand.com,
noted that a number of search companies have failed in the past to break
through in a market dominated by Google.
"By no means do I expect Blekko to become a Google killer," Sullivan
said in a blog post. "Despite Google's flaws, it works extremely well
for millions of people each day."
But Sullivan said Blekko might find an audience among Web users "who
seek an alternative for when Google or (Microsoft's) Bing don't come
through.
"Special interest groups might also be attracted to the ability to
create their own custom search engines," he said. "If anything, I think
that's Blekko's ultimate strength."
Creative Announces Tablets Starting at $249
Creative Labs on Tuesday announced entry-level media tablets with 7-inch
and 10-inch touchscreens, with prices ranging from US$249 to $319.
The Ziio Pure Wireless Entertainment tablets come with Google's Android
2.1 OS and storage ranging from 8GB to 16GB. Some models are priced
lower than Archos' 101 Internet Tablet and Velocity Micro's Cruz tablet,
which are priced at $299.
The tablets will start shipping in early December, Creative said.
The Ziio tablet will join a highly competitive market led by Apple's
iPad, which shipped in April. Samsung has already started selling its
Galaxy Tab in some countries, and Research In Motion, Hewlett-Packard
and Dell have announced plans to launch tablets. Research firm Gartner
is pegging tablet shipments to reach 54.8 million units next year.
Creative is primarily known for its portable media players, speakers and
headsets, and has built the tablet to its strengths. The company says
the tablet is able to sync with its audio products via Bluetooth to play
music. The device includes an audio application and an Apt-X codec to
achieve quality audio streaming and playback.
Beyond music, users will be able to check e-mail, surf the Web or play
casual games, Creative said. Applications are offered through the
company's ZiiStore.
The tablet is powered by the homegrown ZMS-08 processor, which is based
on a 1GHz Arm processor and can play 1080p video. The device comes with
an HDMI (high-definition multimedia interface) port to play video from
the tablet on high-definition TVs. It also comes with a MicroSD card
slot for additional storage.
The device comes with a front-facing camera and has Wi-Fi capabilities.
The company says the device can play back up to five hours of video on a
single battery charge.
The 7-inch tablet weighs 400 grams (0.88 pounds), while the 10-inch
tablet weighs 650 grams.
OLPC XO-3 Tablet Delayed
Nicholas Negroponte, chairman of One Laptop Per Child said that the XO-3
tablet computer will debut sometime in February 2011, about 45 days later
than originally planned.
Negroponte said that he wants the screen to be flexible so that it is
more resistant to breaking, but that it doesn't need to roll up.
"The issue has been really finding an unbreakable material, which may
not be plastic, it may be glass or some flavor of glass," he said during
a video interview at MIT.
At first the XO-3 won't be branded OLPC, rather made by Marvell, with the
actual XO-3 to follow.
The tablet will eventually cost US$75 and during a May 2010 interview,
Negroponte said hitting that mark wouldn't be a problem.
Sitting in his sparse office in the MIT Media Lab, which he founded 25
years ago, Negroponte said that the job of the XO-3 is "pushing where
normal market forces wouldn't otherwise."
"We're going to push down on price, we're going to push on non-breakable,
we're going to push particularly on power because we want to hand crank
these things," he said. "Our characteristics are ones that the market
wouldn't do normally, but that we will bring sooner or prove that can be
done."
Once the XO-3 tablet does debut, it will co-exist "for some time" along
with the original laptop.
"It is unclear to us now both in the labs and imagining the future if
the haptic version of the tablet keyboard is going to be sufficient to
allow you to use it as a general purpose computer," Negroponte said.
MacBook Air Problem Reportedly Confirmed by Memo
An Air leak is causing problems for Apple. A memo circulating on tech
web sites, purporting to be a leaked internal document from the
Cupertino, Calif.-based company, confirms reports of display problems
for the new MacBook Air.
There have been complaints on tech sites and in several Apple-focused
forums about flickering horizontal lines in the new product. Apple
hasn't publicly indicated it's aware of a problem, but the memo, first
published Thursday on Boy Genius Report and dated Oct. 27, said the
"internal display fades dark to light colors after waking from sleep."
The memo, which is marked "Apple Internal Use Only" and
"Issue/Investigation in Progress," said the problem affects both the
13-inch and the 11-inch models. The newest MacBook Air was unveiled about
two weeks ago, and is the thinnest computer yet from Apple.
The resolution to the problem, according to the memo, is to "have the
customer put the computer to sleep by closing the lid, wait 10 seconds,
then open the lid to wake the computer." It added that this action
"should force a display power cycle, and the display should return to
normal."
The memo also said the "issue has been isolated and will be fixed in an
upcoming software update." It recommends that Apple take the position
that "it is aware of the issue and is working on a solution."
In addition to the flickering horizontal lines after waking from sleep,
there are reports of a similar issue if an external display is plugged
in. Additionally, some users are finding a bug that causes the screen to
fade to dark from light repeatedly, also after waking, and there are
postings on forums about screen freezes and a distortion that looks like
water ripples vibrating.
There are also reports that battery life is reduced by as much as third
by installing Adobe Flash on the Safari browser. Apple has had a running
battle with Adobe over the use of Flash on its devices, contending that
HTML5 and other open-source technologies are better for users in the
long run.
In addition to normal customer relations, Apple is being watched
carefully as to its response on this apparent product defect.
During the summer, it continually denied and downplayed antenna-reception
problems that were being repeatedly reported for the iPhone 4. Users were
saying that, if they placed their hand or finger on the corner where the
antenna was, the device suffered a signal loss.
In addition to not acknowledging the problem, Apple at one point issued
a software update to the signal meter, suggesting that the signal-loss
issue was really a problem of how the signal strength was being
perceived by the user.
The matter was even dubbed Antennagate by some in the press. Finally,
Consumer Reports issued several negative reviews in which the nonprofit
organization said it "can't recommend the iPhone 4" because its tests
showed an antenna problem that could be fixed by a "bumper" case.
Apple held a hastily arranged press conference. At the event, Apple
acknowledged the problem, offered a free bumper case for every iPhone 4
customer, a refund for any case already purchased, or a full refund for
an undamaged iPhone 4.
What You Need to Know About New IE Zero-Day
Internet Explorer is under attack again. Microsoft has issued a security
advisory explaining a newly-discovered exploit impacting most versions of
the Internet Explorer Web browser. The security advisory contains details
about the threat, as well as some guidance to protect vulnerable browsers
pending a patch from Microsoft to fix the hole.
Andrew Storms, Director of Security Operations for nCircle, commented on
the new threat, "It's always a serious concern when an IE zero-day surfaces,
especially when it affects all versions of the browser. It's a little late
for Halloween, but two zero days in one week is almost enough to make IT
security teams run away screaming."
Storms added, "There is some good news however; Microsoft says the attacks
are limited at the moment and data execution prevention (DEP), a security
safeguard in newer versions of Windows, may be able to prevent attack
execution."
A spokesperson from Symantec e-mailed me with these details. "A new
zero-day vulnerability affecting Internet Explorer 6 and 7 is being used in
targeted attacks. In these attacks people receive emails with a link
pointing to a page which determines if a visitor is using Internet
Explorer 6 and 7. If so, the script transfers the visitor unknowingly to
the page hosting the exploit where malware is downloaded and runs on their
computer without any user interaction. The vulnerability allows for any
remote program to be executed without the end user's notice."
According to a post on the Microsoft Security Response Center blog, the
issue also affects Internet Explorer 8, but not the beta of Internet
Explorer 9. Microsoft also stresses, though, that while IE8 might be
technically vulnerable, its superior security controls make it unlikely
that it could be exploited. "Impacted versions include Internet Explorer 6,
7 and 8, although our ongoing investigation confirms that default
installations of Internet Explorer 8 are unlikely to be exploited by this
issue. This is due to the defense in depth protections offered from Data
Execution Prevention (DEP), which is enabled by default in Internet
Explorer 8 on all supported Windows platforms."
A Symantec blog post describes the threat, and the e-mails used to initiate
the exploit. The discovery of this attack was related to targeted e-mails
sent to a limited number of potential victims--indicating that perhaps the
attackers were seeking to compromise specific targets rather than any random
vulnerable system connected to the Internet.
The Symantec post explains, "Visitors who were served the exploit page
didn't realize it, but went on to download and run a piece of malware on
their computer without any interaction at all. The vulnerability allowed
for any remote program to be executed without the end user's notice.
Once infected, the malware set itself to start up with the computer,
along with a service named 'NetWare Workstation'. The piece of malware
opens a backdoor on the computer and then contacts remote servers. It
tries to contact a specific server hosted in Poland for small files
named with a .gif extension. These small files are actually encrypted
files with commands telling the Trojan what to do next."
The Microsoft security advisory lists mitigating factors and workarounds
to help users and IT admins guard against this threat. Microsoft
recommends that users read e-mail messages in plain text, rather than
HTML. Users of Internet Explorer 7 can turn on DEP--which is present,
but not enabled by default - to offer additional protection.
Those unfortunate souls that still rely on Internet Explorer 6 are
directed to set the Internet and Local Intranet security zones in the
browser to High in order to block execution of Active X controls and
scripts. In addition, a custom CSS style can be forced to override the
Web CSS style sheets to prevent exploit, and organizations can also use
the Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit to take advantage of newer
security controls on older, less secure software.
Arguably, the simplest solution, though, is to simply install the beta
version of Internet Explorer 9. Then you can protect your PCagainst this
attack, and experience the new features and benefits of IE9 at the same
time.
Candidates with More Facebook Fans Won 70 Percent of Races
Candidates with a greater number of Facebook fans than their opponents won
more than 70 percent of races for the US Congress, according to figures
released on Wednesday.
Facebook said that in 98 of Tuesday's most hotly contested House races,
74 percent of the candidates with the most Facebook fans won.
Sixty-nine candidates for the House with the most Facebook fans won
while 24 candidates with the most Facebook fans lost, the Palo Alto,
California-based social network said in a statement.
Five House races are still too close to call.
In the Senate, 82 percent of the 34 Senate races that have been decided
were won by the candidate with more Facebook fans.
Twenty-eight Senate candidates with the most Facebook fans won while six
candidates with the most Facebook fans lost. Three races are undecided.
According to the blog AllFacebook.com, which has compiled figures from
across the country, Republican candidates outpolled Democrats on
Facebook in the races for the Senate, House of Representatives and state
governor.
Overall, the Facebook pages of Republican candidates attracted 3.48
million fans while Democratic candidates drew 1.45 million, according to
AllFacebook.com, which is independent of the social network.
Republican candidates for the Senate, House or governor occupied eight
of the top 10 slots when it comes to Facebook fans.
Bill White, a Democrat running for governor of Texas, had the most fans
of any Democrat - 153,391 - but lost his race.
The only other Democrat to crack the top 10 - California gubernatorial
candidate Jerry Brown with 98,573 - won his race, beating former eBay
chief executive Meg Whitman and her 207,818 Facebook fans.
Republicans, led by the ultra-conservative Tea Party movement, picked up
at least 60 seats in the House in Tuesday's election in the one of the
chamber's largest political swings of the past century. Republicans also
snatched six seats in the Senate.
Google Agrees To Settle Buzz Class Action for $8 Million
Google Inc., the top Web search provider, will allocate about $8.5 million
to Internet privacy and policy organizations as part of a class action
settlement involving its Buzz social hub.
The lawsuit had been filed by users of Google's free e-mail service,
Gmail. In February, Google added a new social hub called Buzz, which let
Gmail users track their frequently e-mailed contacts' status updates and
other information shared online. But frequent e-mails don't necessarily
mean people are actually "friends." The class action suit said Google
violated privacy rights by automatically adding Buzz to Gmail without
making it clear what information would be shared and with whom.
The settlement announced Tuesday acknowledges that Google has made many
changes to Buzz to ease privacy concerns. Google is creating an $8.5
million fund, mainly to go to Internet privacy and policy organizations.
The company said it will also make additional efforts to teach users
about privacy on Buzz.
A federal judge has given the settlement preliminary approval. The U.S.
District Court in San Jose, Calif., will consider final approval of the
proposed settlement on Jan. 31, 2011.
And So The Exodus Begins - 33 Developers Leave OpenOffice.org
We all knew that it would come to this and it has finally happened - 33
developers have left OpenOffice.org to join The Document Foundation, with
more expected to leave in the next few days.
Here is a brief history of what happened for those of you who do not know.
After Oracle acquired Sun Microsystems, OpenOffice.org fell into the hands
of Oracle, as did a lot of other products. So, last month a few very
prominent members of the OpenOffice.org community decided to form The
Document Foundation and fork OpenOffice.org as LibreOffice, possibly
fearing that it could go the OpenSolaris way.
They invited Oracle to join The Document Foundation and to donate the brand
"OpenOffice.org". LibreOffice was chosen as a temporary name until Oracle
agrees to donate the brand.
Oracle was not pleased and asks those who founded The Document Foundation
to leave OpenOffice.org citing "conflict of interest".
As Oracle has given them no choice, they left OpenOffice.org along with 33
other developers.
This is what Jacqueline Rahemipour, Co-Lead, OpenOffice.org Board, wrote:
Although it has been stressed several times that there will be
collaboration on a technical level, and changes are possible - there is
no indication from Oracle to change its mind on the question of the
project organization and management. For those who want to achieve such
a change, but see no realistic opportunity within the current project
and are therefore involved in the TDF, unfortunately this results in an
"either / or" question.
The answer for us who sign this letter is clear: We want a change to
give the community as well as the software it develops the opportunity
to evolve. For this reason, from now on we will support The Document
Foundation and will - as a team - develop and promote LibreOffice.
LibreOffice has already got backing from Google, Novell, Red Hat,
Canonical etc. Mark Shuttleworth had even said that it may replace
OpenOffice.org in future Ubuntu releases. So, the future looks bright for
LibreOffice and The Document Foundation and it looks gloomy for
OpenOffice.org.
=~=~=~=
Atari Online News, Etc. is a weekly publication covering the entire
Atari community. Reprint permission is granted, unless otherwise noted
at the beginning of any article, to Atari user groups and not for
profit publications only under the following terms: articles must
remain unedited and include the issue number and author at the top of
each article reprinted. Other reprints granted upon approval of
request. Send requests to: dpj@atarinews.org
No issue of Atari Online News, Etc. may be included on any
commercial
media, nor uploaded or transmitted to any commercial online service or
internet site, in whole or in part, by any agent or means, without
the expressed consent or permission from the Publisher or Editor of
Atari Online News, Etc.
Opinions presented herein are those of the individual authors and do
not necessarily reflect those of the staff, or of the publishers. All
material herein is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing.
