Slashdot Mirror

Last week, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC, revealed its new employee -- an interactive robot named Pepper. According to Softbank, the company that created the 4-foot-tall humanoid robot, Pepper will help guide museum visitors through the museum and provide insight on different exhibits. CNET reports: Pepper is programmed to answer commonly asked questions and tell stories. The robot can react and make gestures, and is equipped with an interactive touch screen. To entertain museum visitors, Pepper often dances and poses for selfies, which will undoubtably attract a crowd. In each of the different museum branches, the Pepper robots perform different docent duties. For example, at the National Museum of African Art, Pepper can translate phrases in the Kiswahili (Swahili) language. At the National Museum of African American History and Culture, Pepper robots guide visitors to the Rosa Parks VR experience. Pepper robots are also programmed to teach visiting students coding and software engineering in the Smithsonian's teen educational space ARTLAB+.

Last week, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC, revealed its new employee -- an interactive robot named Pepper. According to Softbank, the company that created the 4-foot-tall humanoid robot, Pepper will help guide museum visitors through the museum and provide insight on different exhibits. CNET reports: Pepper is programmed to answer commonly asked questions and tell stories. The robot can react and make gestures, and is equipped with an interactive touch screen. To entertain museum visitors, Pepper often dances and poses for selfies, which will undoubtably attract a crowd. In each of the different museum branches, the Pepper robots perform different docent duties. For example, at the National Museum of African Art, Pepper can translate phrases in the Kiswahili (Swahili) language. At the National Museum of African American History and Culture, Pepper robots guide visitors to the Rosa Parks VR experience. Pepper robots are also programmed to teach visiting students coding and software engineering in the Smithsonian's teen educational space ARTLAB+.

Zothecula writes: Until the 1960s, Japan's three I-400-class subs were the largest submarines ever built. They were so large, in fact, that they could each carry and launch three Aichi M6A Seiran amphibious aircraft. The idea was that the submarines could stealthily bring the planes to within striking distance of US coastal cities, where they could then take off and conduct bombing runs. Now, for the first time since it was scuttled at the end of World War II, one of the sunken subs' aircraft hangars has been photographed. The M6A on display at the Air and Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy Center is worth seeing, if you get a chance.

plover writes "The Seattle Times reports, 'The Smithsonian Institution is launching a new 3D scanning and printing initiative to make more of its massive collection accessible to schools, researchers and the public worldwide. A small team has begun creating 3D models of some key objects representing the breadth of the collection at the world's largest museum complex. Some of the first 3D scans include the Wright brothers' first airplane, Amelia Earhart's flight suit, casts of President Abraham Lincoln's face during the Civil War and a Revolutionary War gunboat. Less familiar objects include a former slave's horn, a missionary's gun from the 1800s and a woolly mammoth fossil from the Ice Age. They are pieces of history some people may hear about but rarely see or touch.' So far they have posted 20 models, with the promise of many more to come." They even have a model supernova remnant.

plover writes "The Seattle Times reports, 'The Smithsonian Institution is launching a new 3D scanning and printing initiative to make more of its massive collection accessible to schools, researchers and the public worldwide. A small team has begun creating 3D models of some key objects representing the breadth of the collection at the world's largest museum complex. Some of the first 3D scans include the Wright brothers' first airplane, Amelia Earhart's flight suit, casts of President Abraham Lincoln's face during the Civil War and a Revolutionary War gunboat. Less familiar objects include a former slave's horn, a missionary's gun from the 1800s and a woolly mammoth fossil from the Ice Age. They are pieces of history some people may hear about but rarely see or touch.' So far they have posted 20 models, with the promise of many more to come." They even have a model supernova remnant.

plover writes "The Seattle Times reports, 'The Smithsonian Institution is launching a new 3D scanning and printing initiative to make more of its massive collection accessible to schools, researchers and the public worldwide. A small team has begun creating 3D models of some key objects representing the breadth of the collection at the world's largest museum complex. Some of the first 3D scans include the Wright brothers' first airplane, Amelia Earhart's flight suit, casts of President Abraham Lincoln's face during the Civil War and a Revolutionary War gunboat. Less familiar objects include a former slave's horn, a missionary's gun from the 1800s and a woolly mammoth fossil from the Ice Age. They are pieces of history some people may hear about but rarely see or touch.' So far they have posted 20 models, with the promise of many more to come." They even have a model supernova remnant.

plover writes "The Seattle Times reports, 'The Smithsonian Institution is launching a new 3D scanning and printing initiative to make more of its massive collection accessible to schools, researchers and the public worldwide. A small team has begun creating 3D models of some key objects representing the breadth of the collection at the world's largest museum complex. Some of the first 3D scans include the Wright brothers' first airplane, Amelia Earhart's flight suit, casts of President Abraham Lincoln's face during the Civil War and a Revolutionary War gunboat. Less familiar objects include a former slave's horn, a missionary's gun from the 1800s and a woolly mammoth fossil from the Ice Age. They are pieces of history some people may hear about but rarely see or touch.' So far they have posted 20 models, with the promise of many more to come." They even have a model supernova remnant.

coondoggie writes "Barring bad weather, NASA said the space shuttle Discovery mounted atop the space agency's 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft will make a series of low passes — 1,500 ft. — around parts of Washington DC on April 17 between 10-11 am eastern daylight time." Discovery will be on its way to the Smithsonian from Florida; this is a rare chance in the post-shuttle era for people to still see a shuttle in flight; I'm planning a marathon drive to reach the parking lot at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center for what NASA's calling Shuttle Fly-In Day, in hopes of catching a glimpse.

bednarz writes "The Smithsonian's 'Art of Video Games' exhibition opens today. To kick it off, they're holding a three-day festival with panel discussions, live action gaming, and crafting activities. 'Video games allow us as human beings to explore our dreams, our fears, our thoughts, our morals, and engage with each other in a way that no other medium allows us to. I find that inspiring and beautiful, and I am so happy to be alive during this time. We are going to experience, I think, one of the greatest surges of artistic intent in human history, and I believe that the majority of it will come through video games,' said Chris Melissinos, former Sun exec and guest curator of the new exhibition."

bednarz writes "The Smithsonian's 'Art of Video Games' exhibition opens today. To kick it off, they're holding a three-day festival with panel discussions, live action gaming, and crafting activities. 'Video games allow us as human beings to explore our dreams, our fears, our thoughts, our morals, and engage with each other in a way that no other medium allows us to. I find that inspiring and beautiful, and I am so happy to be alive during this time. We are going to experience, I think, one of the greatest surges of artistic intent in human history, and I believe that the majority of it will come through video games,' said Chris Melissinos, former Sun exec and guest curator of the new exhibition."

astroengine writes "A group called Transception Incorporated, self-described as an Austin, Texas-based psychic R&D operation, sent a letter (PDF) to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden that nominates the Apollo 16 crew for the Congressional Space Medal of Honor. Why? Well, a variety of 'shipwreck elements' on the Moon — described as 'structures, people/aliens, biological technology, and their plight' — were reportedly 'seen' through remote viewing (PDF) by six experts at Transception. These 'elements' can be seen, along with Apollo 16 moonwalkers John Young and Charles Duke, in photographs during that famous mission, obviously making this the first ever alien encounter."

You asked Carl Malamud about his experiences and hopes in the gargantuan project he's undertaken to prod the U.S. government into scanning archived documents, and to make public access (rather than availability only through special dispensation) the default for newly created, timely government data. (Malamud points out that if you have comments on what the government should be focusing on preserving, and how they should go about it, the National Archives would like to read them.) Below find answers with a mix of heartening and disheartening information about how the vast project is progressing.

LoC?
by an Anonymous Reader

So how many GB/TB is a Library of Congress? :)

Or, more seriously, how big are you estimating? Are you using raw scans or some sort of compression (JPG, PNG, etc)? What resolution are you using? Do you vary the resolution depending on the document?

What sort of meta data are you putting in?

CM: The reason John Podesta and I suggested a Federal Scanning Commission in our letter at YesWeScan.Org is we really don't know how big the holdings of the government are. I can tell you that the Library of Congress is about 32 million cataloged books (a significant increase from the 6,487 books Thomas Jefferson donated to get them started). But, this is about more than books, it is about paper records, microfilmed technical papers, video, audio, photographs, and much more.

The scale is fairly vast. The Smithsonian has 137 million objects, including about 13 million images. David Ferriero, the Archivist of the United States estimates he has over 10 billion pages of text documents, 7.2 million maps, and 40 million photographs including everything from past census records to presidential dinner menus, and that includes about 7.5 million motion pictures and sound recordings. The Government Printing Office distributes their documents to the Federal Depository Library Program, and that includes over 60 million pages of collections including the Official Journals of Government such as the Federal Register. That's just scratching the surface, and we recommended a Federal Scanning Commission to begin the process of understanding what we have (and what is worth digitizing).

As to standards? There are lots of pretty good standards on how to digitize. NARA, Library of Congress, GPO all spec out document scans at 400 dpi, for example. For photographs, moving images, and other objects, there are some pretty good and pretty detailed standards at www.digitizationguidelines.gov. I know Brewster Kahle's operation and my own tend to work off those specifications (in fact Brewster does quite a bit of scanning for the government).

As to compression? Well, I've found people tend to overcompress things. That said, sometimes the initial quality isn't that great, so a 600 dpi uncompressed scan would be silly in some cases. But, for photographs I try very hard to keep the TIFF images around and not rely on JPEG. Likewise, for audio it is really nice to keep a nice 48 khz version of your file around if you can simply because if you screw up the compression maybe somebody else can do a better job in a few years. Disk space is relatively cheap, so that isn't the barrier it used to be. For video, I rip MPEG2 at whatever it is on a DVD, when I'm actually digitizing I try to get the video bitrate up to 8-10 mbps when ripping a Betacam or Umatic. Some people think that is overkill, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Metadata? Well, you got to have it or you're not going to get very far when it comes to access. Many librarians have made perfect the enemy of the good when it comes to metadata and have resisted any attempt at digitization because we don't have the very best metadata we might have. I'm more in the camp of scan what you have and get as much of the metadata as you can into it. For example, we have 3,200 1000-page volumes of briefs from the 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. We didn't have good metadata, but we had the Internet Archive scan them anyway. Then, after we got our PDF files, I shipped those off to a double-key team in India and they broke the briefs up into individual documents and typed the metadata into a spreadsheet for me, which we hope to release soon.

My point is that sometimes you can shoehorn the metadata in after the fact or you can use a variety of techniques to pull the metadata out of the documents (e.g., smart OCR). In theory, you can use crowdsourcing to get the metadata, but so far I've not had a lot of luck persuading thousands of people to spend their time doing that kind of work. A captcha is a quick thing to do and is between you and something you want, whereas entering metadata in for videos or documents is one of those civic duty things that everybody thinks everybody else should be doing.

Total size? Brewster says a book is about 400 Mbytes (though he's very quick to point out that you could put the words in all the books in the library into a terabyte and if you're distributing PDFs, you can easily throw 130,000 full-color, searchable PDFs onto a 4 TB drive). But, you were probably asking about raw data. Here's some raw numbers:

32 million books at 400 Mbytes each is 12.8 petabytes 50 million photos at 150 Mbytes each is 7.5 petabytes 10 billion pieces of paper ("records") at 100 Kbytes each is 1 petabyte 20 years of video at 8 mbps is only 630 Tbytes.

(Somebody check my math?)

If you're talking a decade-long federal digitization initiative, we're looking at well south of 50 petabytes, which seems pretty doable in this day and age!



Can the rare books collections be digitized?
by autophile

Three closely related questions about the rare books collections at the Library of Congress:

1. I know there is some kind of effort going on to digitize the rare books collections, but can it be sped up? There are many high-quality low-cost archival book scanners out there (such as the ones developed at diybookscanner.org).

2. It gets really annoying to have to receive paper copies of books when copies are requested. Why not DVDs of high-quality images?

3. Why is there no outreach by the LoC to smaller, cheaper book scanning efforts? The Internet Archive, DIYBookscanner.org, and Decapod all come to mind.

CM: In reverse order. I don't know why we aren't distributing and decentralizing our scanning efforts. The Internet Archive is a heavy-duty production shop and they do an amazing job, as do folks like Google Books and the folks digitizing things the Mormon Church. But, there are a bunch of DIY solutions and it would be really nice if we could get more people pitching in. The biggest problem on distributing the digitization efforts is quality control. I know when it comes to ripping video, I can easily teach other people how to grab an MPEG2 off a DVD, but when it comes to things like digitizing a Betacam, that takes some training. But, we're all trainable and I wish we could all do more.

Getting back paper copies of books and papers when they're doing a copy anyway is just plain dumb. Likewise with things like FOIA results. John Podesta testified before the Senate about FOIA and said if an agency answers a FOIA request, they should also post their result online so others can see it. That seems pretty obvious.

As far as digitizing rare book collections, there are some amazing pockets throughout the government but there is no real coordination and there certainly is no effort to scan at scale or to come up with a realistic national digitization strategy. That is why we called on the White House to lead the effort. Within the Library of Congress there are some amazing collections, but if you look around to places like the National Agricultural Library or the National Library of Medicine or the libraries in the service academies you'll find lots more. Some have argued that digitizing rare books is silly because the audience is just a few academics, but I can tell you from my own experience helping host the network site for the Archimedes Palimpsest that when you make this kind of information available, there is an amazing long tail.

If you scan it, they will come. And, to answer your question, if we all scan it, they will come much sooner.



Real time legislation drafting
by kerskine

Would it be possible to implement a system that would allow real-time and continuous review of legislation while it's being drafted? Much has been made over the past three years about legislation being available for review before voting by the House or Senate. The final draft for review usually is huge PDF that makes it near impossible for citizens, interest groups, and the media to thoroughly analysis in time.

CM: You want to see the sausage being made not just buy the hot dog! I'll comment on the U.S. Congress since that's the system I know best. Thomas is a pretty good system if you happen to be stuck in 1994. It does have all the amendments and the actions and the various stages that legislation go through. But, it isn't real time, more like "pretty quick." As Van Jacobson once quipped, "Same day service in a nanosecond world." And, Thomas isn't really machine processable, it is final form, usually formatted ASCII text (shades of NROFF!). People like Josh Tauberer who built GovTrack.US have spent considerable time crawling those systems and trying to get the data into regularized formats and make it available to others to reuse via APIs, but that isn't the same as exposing the inner working of the sausage factory.

Majority Leader Cantor's staff has been pushing a system to make the raw data all available in XML from the Clerk's office and I think that is a very promising initiative which hopefully will bear fruit. (They're having a February 2 conference to discuss their plans if you are interested. I have no idea if it will be streamed for those of who aren't Inside the Beltway and I don't know their schedule for moving past conferences and into production.)

Congress is a pretty complicated beast. I know some folks like Sean McGrath have had better luck with some of the state legislatures. The problem is you need to dig deep into the inner working of a legislature. In the Congress, that means you're changing things like authoring tools that are used in the Clerk's office and by all the staff members, so you have to be careful or you get a bunch of really angry Congressman yelling at you because their staff can't crank out the flavor-of-the-week in the form of a bill or amendment.

There's also a bit of an issue of will. My work with the Congress to put hearings on-line showed that you could take the official transcripts of a hearing and use those to generate closed captions on the video. All you need is the official transcript of the hearing, but in order to get those I had to execute a special Memorandum of Understanding with the House Oversight Committee. Other committees guard their transcripts jealously and won't let them out for several when. When I started processing a bunch of historical videos we purchased from C-SPAN, I went to the Government Printing Office and found that many committees never deliver their transcripts, even a decade after the fact!



How to keep track of legislative activity about open access?
by oneiros27

Recently in the federal register, there were two calls for comments about access to data and research from federally funded research:

http://federalregister.gov/a/2011-28623 [federalregister.gov] http://federalregister.gov/a/2011-28621 [federalregister.gov]

I didn't hear about these until ~4 weeks after the original announcement, and with the holidays, it was too late to try to get the societies I'm involved with to prepare and vote on official statements. Are there any places where people can get/post notices of these sorts of things so that we can stay informed and try to help influence policies?

CM: The Federal Register is getting a lot better now that it is a much more open system. The idea of "Federal Register 2.0" was a paper I wrote for the Obama transition, so it is an issue I've tracked pretty closely and frankly, I've been amazed at how much better it is now. What they did is instead of selling the raw data feed for the Federal Register for $17,000/year, they went from SGML to XML and then released the data in bulk for free. A few guys out in San Francisco were looking for something to do to enter a contest and they took that bulk data and dreamed up GovPulse.US. That was such a better version of the Federal Register that the Office of the Federal Register switched the official site over to their open source platform. My point is the tools are there to do better notification mechanisms, and I'm sure the government would welcome somebody grabbing the GovPulse.US code out of Github and making it even better.

That's the technical answer. But, the substantive answer is that there is a huge boatload of stuff in the Federal Register and it is pretty hard to figure out what to pay attention to. I also missed that particular call for comment, and I've even missed several Requests for Information coming out of places I try and pay attention to, like the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy. And, I do this stuff full-time! Perhaps better targeted notification mechanisms are the answer. Maybe it is a social media solution, where you pay attention to things your friends are paying attention to. I hope the answer is not that the only way to pay attention is to be employed with a beltway bandit which can afford hundreds of minions that do nothing but pay attention to Washington. Indeed, there are some very fancy for-pay services from folks like Congressional Quarterly and Bloomberg that cost an arm and a leg, but I can't help but think there has to be a better way that is also open.



What do you think of corporate partnerships?
by mhh5

I'd like to know what you think about corporate partnerships in the process to get public data released. (I'm not sure if Google Patents existed before the USPTO released its databases.) Do corporations that get involved in the process tend to make the process better without question, or are there tradeoffs in some areas because the corporations always want to help but then try to retain a proprietary version of the data for themselves?

CM: The theory is that the government gets some kind of valuable service (like digitization) that the government wouldn't get otherwise so it is a "win-win." But, the reality is all too often the government gets snookered and what we do is give some corporation exclusive access to some pot of data and the government doesn't get much of anything. The deal between Amazon and the National Archives was a good example of that kind of a private fence around the public domain. With a help from Boing Boing, I started systematically purchasing those public domain videos and re-releasing them in the wild. I have no problem with Amazon selling public domain video, I just hate it when they get a de facto or a contractual exclusive. (My testimony before Congress on this subject is here.)

There are lots of other examples of government getting snookered. For example, the Government Accountability Office let Thomson West get access to 60 million or so pages of federal legislative histories. At great cost to the government, they were all packed up and dispatched to West which digitized them all and then sent them back to the government. West now sells access to his amazing database. What did the government get for it's trouble? A few logins for GAO staffers. Even members of Congress need to pay to access the database! (We have an interesting paper trail on this issue.)

I'm glad you brought up the Google Patent system because I was personally involved in making that happen and I can tell you that this one is totally legit. Jon Orwant is the lead developer on this for Google and I played a small part in helping convince the White House and the Patent Office they ought to give Jon access to their data (the heavy lifting on that deal was by Beth Noveck who was the Deputy CTO at the time). Google makes all the data they got from the Patent Office available for bulk access with no strings attached. I can vouch for that because I did a mirror of their system. Last I heard Google was sending out anywhere from 1 to 10 terabytes of data PER DAY to external sources and even normally very critical folks who work in this arena have been really happy.

The big problem in the Patent Office is their computing infrastructure is a real catastrophe. Their power plant is over 95% capacity (e.g., plug in a computer, bring the building down!) and even though the Under Secretary knew that selling DVD subscriptions was silly, he wasn't able to switch over to an FTP service. He cut the deal with Google Patent and it worked out well for the government, for Google, and for everybody else.

What's the difference between the Google deal and the Amazon deal? In the case of the Amazon and GAO/West deals, the government lawyers did all the negotiating and they were totally outsmarted by some sharks in industry. But, when government has people like Under Secretary Kappos and Beth Noveck doing the negotiating, these things can work out just fine. The key is government should partner with people who want to do public service, not people who want to service the public.

Encouraging Governments?
by theNAM666

In a city such as Nashville, things as basic as business ownership and property records are not available online. In states such as New Jersey, public records such as basic corporate filings (officers, operating address/address for service of process) are accessible only for a fee.

What concrete actions can citizens confronting such situations, take to encourage accessibility and accountability?

CM: I find you need a carrot and a stick to make this stuff happen, especially at the local level. Folks like Everyblock.Com and CodeForAmerica.Org have done great working prying some of these databases loose, but there is still lots to do.

The first thing you should do is pick up the phone (or pick up your email client) and write/call the people who run the system. Ask them if you can have access to the data. Sometimes, it is as simple as that.

Other times, though, it isn't quite as simple since they want the money (or they want the control or they think this should be done by "private industry" by which they mean some buddy who is a contractor). The nice thing about any government system is somebody usually has oversight responsibilities. So, the next step is to find a city council member of state legislator who has oversight on the agency in question and ask them.

Again, life isn't usually that simple, but sometimes you win! If you can't get anywhere that way, what I usually end up doing is basically competing with the government system. Build a proxy system like RECAPtheLaw.Org did to recycle paid documents. Or, get a sponsor and buy a reasonable number of docs and build a web site that looks like it is going to be a real production system.

Then, go back again and ask. Maybe if you have eyeballs or at least have a nice web site, that is enough to get the government moving. But, if that doesn't do the job, you may have no choice but to compete with them for real, which of course requires a big commitment in time and energy and not everybody can do that. I know in the case of the Patent Office, I started pestering them in 1993, including several times when I spent 6-figure sums purchasing their data, and it still took until 2011 to crack that nut.

The real trick is focus/obsession. Pick one thing you really care about and just keep pestering them until you crack it open. If you're surfing from one opengov problem to another, showing up for a 1-day hackathon then moving on to something else, you're not going to get anywhere. Pick something real and make it your thing.



Privately Owned, Copyrighted Law
by AdamnSelene

I think I have read that the law itself cannot be copyrighted and it should be possible to make it available available to everyone. But as a techie who drafts standards and specifications, I was wondering about how far this goes--especially since Congress recently proposed enacting some of our standards into law. (They decided not to, but they read some parts into the committee records as they debated.) Can you still accomplish your project if a governmental body adopts (or considers adopting) a privately owned, copyrighted technical reference manual or set of safety standards as administrative law (or regulations that carry the force of law)? Or would such obstacles keep you from being able to digitize all of the government's laws (and archives of proposed laws)?

CM: The idea that the law has no copyright is a fundamental part of the American system of government. That applies to states and municipalities as well. The basic decision is Wheaton v. Peters from 1834 but that decision has been reaffirmed over and over. The law is sacred in the American system. You can't have equal protection under the law or due process under the law if there is a poll tax on access to justice.

When we get to a privately developed standards however, it turns into a very interesting issue. The basic mechanism is called Incorporation by Reference. The government will take some external document (such as a model building code) and incorporate the entire text to make it the law of the land. A guy named Peter Veeck was responsible for a landmark decision in 2002 when he published the Texas Building Code which was an incorporation of a privately-developed and very expensive model code. The court ruled that while the model code had copyright, the law of the land did not.

Based on the Veeck decision, my group went and posted many of the public safety codes enacted by the states. We started by purchasing model codes, finding the incorporating legislation, and concatenating the two pieces together and posting the resulting PDFs. More recently, we've done some extensive reworking of the California public safety codes, known as Title 24, converting the entire text into valid XHTML, recoding the graphics as SVG graphics, the formulas as MathML, and regenerating the PDF documents as nicely typeset documents instead of low-quality scans. You can see this work on the web but it is also available as Google Code project.

The federal government also uses this mechanism intensively, with over 2,000 standards incorporated into the Code of Federal Regulations. This is non-trivial stuff, things like all the OSHA safety regulations. The issue was recently considered by a federal group called the Administrative Conference of the U.S. which basically rolled over and endorsed the idea that it is ok for important parts of the law to cost money. (Read EFF's protest letter if you want a good critique of what they did.)

I'm not necessarily saying that government should be able to appropriate any privately-developed standard and make it available. And, I'm not necessarily saying you want OSHA bureaucrats drafting the standards. But, I do think the big standards establishment and the government regulators have cut a deal that results in the law not being available and the costs forked off on private citizens and small business with extortionate monopoly prices. I just paid $847 for a 48-page safety standard from Underwriters Labs and $60 for 2-page safety standard from the Society of Automotive Engineers, both of which are mandated by law in the CFR. They do need money to run their operations, but let me just point out that in 2009 the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Underwriters Labs paid their CEO $2,138,984 and the nonprofit SAE paid their CEO $412,578.

Ancestry.com
by An Anonymous Reader

What is your opinion about websites like Ancestry.com which make use of public records and charge a subscription fee for access? What is the incentive for the government to migrate old documents into digital form when services like these exist? Do you think Ancestry.com should be a 501(c)(3)?

CM: I'm not a big fan of for-profit corporations that have a business model of monetizing the public domain. I'm fine if they exist and fine if they make billions of dollars, but if they are the only game in town they've taken something that belongs to all of us and and turned it into their private property.

The government got snookered on the Ancestry.Com deal. They could have insisted that the raw data be available in bulk for anybody else to use. The folks that approach the government to cut these sweetheart deals argue that is unreasonable because they need a "return on investment" and the argue that if they don't get the return on investment they won't do the deal (and by extension nobody else will do the deal).

But, government can argue much harder! For example, instead of negotiating some exclusive thing with Ancestry.Com, how come they didn't ask the Internet Archive to grab the data? Or put together something creative with a couple of foundations that would pay for the digitization in return for the kind of payback the foundations like to see (e.g., good press, photo opportunity with the President, or other tools of the trade)?

You asked if Ancestry.Com should be a 501(c)(3)? Not all nonprofits do something that I think which should be an essential part of their mission, which is allow others to compete with them. I believe providing open access to all data ought to be a precondition to getting nonprofit status (an idea that Gil Elbaz has been pushing for quite some time). A good example of a nonprofit that builds walls is Guidestar which wants to be the place where you go for all your nonprofit information. The IRS should be making all Form 990 returns of nonprofits available in bulk for anybody to use, which would knock the bottom out of Guidestar's attempts to build walls and force them to stay innovative and provide value.

Pacer Problems
by onyxruby

How much difficulty do you anticipate in getting and publishing records in Pacer? If there's one system that should be free it the decisions that our courts make and yet you are charged by the page just to view the results. Are you concerned about a court taking an unkind view on your archiving what is in Pacer?

CM: PACER is an abomination. Do they take a dim view of our efforts? Well, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts reacted so strongly to our efforts to make their data available that they called the FBI on Aaron Swartz and cancelled the only meaningful public access system they had, which consisted of one terminal in each of 17 public libraries around the country. In this era of rapidly decreasing costs, they just boosted their access charges from 8 cents a page to 10 cents a page, arguing that this is a bargain compared to 25 cents a page for a copy machine.

What I find so disturbing about PACER is that when we did get 20 million pages of docs, we were able to conduct a comprehensive analysis of privacy violations in the courts, an analysis that led to a nice thank-you letter from the Judicial Conference and changes in their privacy rules. In other words, only when public interest groups got access to the data did we begin to address privacy issues. Public access is not just about pro se prisoners defending themselves from a jail cell, which is the view of many in the Administrative Office of the Courts. Public access is about attempts like ours (and many other folks) to make our system of justice function better. When we say we are "an empire of laws not a nation of men" that means we write down what we are doing in our courts so that it is no longer the arbitrary decisions of individuals. The paper trail is there so we can make sure the system is functioning properly. When you limit that access to those that only have a Gold Card, you pervert democracy and you pervert justice.

This principle that access to justice shouldn't hide behind a cash register goes back to the Greeks. Theseus in Euripedes' Suppliants said "when there are no public laws, one man holds power by keeping the law all for himself, and there is no more equality. But when the laws are written, the weak man and the rich man have equal justice." The PACER system is justice for the rich man.

Steve Schultze and the team at Princeton did a lot of the heavy lifting on this issue, including the very nice RECAPtheLaw.Org system they built. They've also done a lot of financial analysis that shows that the courts are not only recovering their costs for operating the expensive PACER system, they're making a huge profit (to the tune of $100 million/year) and using their excess profits to do things like buy big-screen TVs in direct violation of the E-Government act.

The basic problem on PACER is the Judicial Conference has delegated the issue to a few techie judges who think what they've built is something great. But, PACER is a hairball of bad PERL code and the result has not served the judges, the bar, or the American people very well. My only hope is that eventually, the Judicial Conference will see that their information technology is 30 years behind the rest of the Internet and feel ashamed at the travesty they have wrought. Until then, we have RECAP.

If you're interested in the issue, a couple of resources to look at are the PACER paper trail and a bit of a rant that I delivered at the Gov 2.0 summit.



How to visualize opened data?
by hardwarejunkie9

The amount of information you're trying to free is entirely staggering and consists, largely, of tables of numbers. These numbers are incredibly significant, but people generally can't see them.

After you free all of this information and make it available to the public (as it should be), then what? What do you expect for the public to do with these numbers? Tables of information are not nearly as useful as graphs. This data needs to be seen, but, more importantly, it needs to be understood.

Do you have any ideas for how to disseminate this information? Perhaps a team-up with someone like gapminder.org's Hans Rosling might be particularly valuable for all of us.

CM: Actually, most of the data I'm looking at is not tables of numbers, it is video, images, textual documents, technical papers, maps, and books.

But, I definitely get what you're saying and there are a lot of numbers. For example, the IRS Form 990s should be structured data instead of PDF documents, so extracting the data from the mass of paper is the initial challenge. There are lots of other examples of this kind of initial extraction, getting what were printed paper docs into structured data. There are some interesting tools, such as OCRopus which does layout analysis, but there needs to be much more. One of the reason we called for a Federal Scanning Commission is that we think there is a lot of directed R&D that could not only scale up mass digitization but could also work on the important value-added of extraction of structured data and handling some of the tricky issues like detecting the presence of Social Security Numbers.

Once you have the data, as you say, then what? I'm a big fan of the idea that the government starts by providing bulk data, then they provide an API, and then maybe they also build web sites and apps and other things along with everybody else out there. That's a 3-part hierarchy that Ed Felten and some of his students developed and it should be a law that applies to all government information systems that are externally facing.

The issue here is that all too often people look at a problem like "digitize all government information" and they want to see the whole stack of the solution from one place. But, I think you can do a layered approach and count on the fact that there is always somebody smarter out there and our job is to reduce the barriers to entry. So, how would I visualize the data? I have no idea, but I'd make damned sure that folks like Martin Wattenberg at Many Eyes and Hans Rosling at Gapminder knew the data was out there and then I'd sit back and be amazed at whatever they come up with. How's that for pushing the problem downstream?



Why is data access so hard?
by CanHasDIY

Can you provide any explanation as to why it is so difficult and cost-prohibitive to obtain records from the government, especially considering the abundance of laws requiring government compliance with requests for information (AKA "Sunshine Laws")?

Is it simply a matter of government employee ineptitude, or have you found evidence of a more nefarious rationale?

CM: I get that question a lot. Why would a member of Congress take deliberate steps to stop public hearings from being available? Why would a court administrator deliberately restrict access to public court documents? Usually the answer is, as Heinlein said, "you have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity." When I'm explaining why something is so broken on a big government system, my usual answer is that there are a lot of people still stuck in the 1970s and 1980s, when information dissemination was really, really hard and it took men in white lab coats and computers the size of freight trains to process data. In other words, the problem with a lot of folks who are government gatekeepers is they just don't get the Internet and they don't get computers. In fact, usually when some senior bureaucrat is throwing stones at me, you can find younger staffers working for them rolling their eyes.

That's an optimistic view, and if I'm right things will get better. But, I'm often wrong on my predictions of the future. (I was the guy who saw TimBL demo the web in 1992 and thought to myself "interesting, but it won't scale.")

But, there is also some more nefarious stuff happening, often the accumulation of power by being able to cut exclusive deals with contractor buddies. If your life in government consists of receiving emissaries from Lockheed Martin, maybe you think you're making everybody happy by letting them build you a $1 billion computer system. Often, you think your problems are so unique that the $1 billion solution is the only answer.

And, in some cases, as we've seen from numerous GAO reports, Inspector General reports, Congressional hearings, and newspaper articles, there are some really evil people out there who think the public domain and the government is their personal business opportunity. Looting the federal government is the kind of civic crime that ranks right up there in my book with stealing cookies from Girl Scouts and selling fake medicines to sick people.



Who is the worst?
by TheBrez

Which government agency is the worst to get information from?

CM: I don't know who the worst are (there's a lot of competition for that slot), but the ones that piss me off the most are the ones that should know better.

Public.Resource.Org is a really small operation. I'm the only staff member. My part-time sysadmin is @mdkail who is pretty busy with his day job as CIO at NetFlix. My ISP is Jim Martin and his team at ISC who are kind of busy running the F-Root. My office net is supported by the amazing systems team at O'Reilly which rents me office space at below-market rates.

I'll grant you government would have a tough time getting that kind of help. But, I'm a one-man shop and we run the 4th most popular U.S. government video channel on YouTube, we're the source for a lot of the on-line presence of the U.S. Court of Appeals, and we've supported efforts for the U.S. Congress, the White House, and the National Archives. If we can do this out of Northern California, couldn't the vast resources of the federal government in Washington, D.C. do a whole lot better than they're doing now?

For me, my current bete noir is the U.S. Congress. We got half-way through processing their archives of video from congressional hearings, publishing about 31 terabytes of data. Then, a couple of staffers decided this was a bad idea and pulled the rug out from under us. They actually decided it was a bad idea to publish video from public congressional hearings.

Like any agency, Congress is a mixed bag. We had tons of support from Darrell Issa, for example, and ran a very successful pilot project for him for a year. We talked to all sorts of people on committees and in the various agencies that support the Congress. But, at the end of the day, a couple of staff members were able to decide that the public archive shouldn't be public and they terminated our project. (If you have some time, you might like to read our rather surreal paper trail.)

So, rather than the worst, I think we need to look for the most shameful, the ones that have the privilege and the power and could easily do better. I know it is in vogue to throw stones at government in general and Washington in particular, but there are times when government can be so useful and so awe inspiring it takes your breath away. Government can be that shining city on the hill but we all have to take an active part in our government to keep those lights shining bright.

schwit1 writes "The Big Bird, formally known as the KH-9 Hexagon satellite, was first placed in orbit in 1971 after its development by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), making it one of the most advanced spy satellites of its time. It is believed to have produced images of the Soviet Union, China and other countries that held strategic importance for the U.S. government through the Cold War. But it was never seen outside the intelligence community. This weekend, it will be available for all in the Washington area to see, but only for one day. To celebrate its 50-year anniversary, the NRO, along with the Smithsonian Institution, is for the first time publicly displaying the newly declassified relic at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Va. In doing so, the intelligence agency is prompting more than just a little bit of excitement among reconnaissance experts and technical hobbyists."

AndrewGOO9 writes "The Smithsonian American Art Museum, in recognizing that electronic games are a part of our artistic history has now unveiled the 80 games out of a proposed pool of 240 that will be included in The Art of Video Games exhibit running from March 16, 2012 to September 30, 2012. While the winning games (PDF), as voted by gamers and art enthusiasts alike, are all stand-out titles, it goes without saying that this a huge step in the recognition of video games as artisitic masterpieces."

AndrewGOO9 writes "The Smithsonian American Art Museum, in recognizing that electronic games are a part of our artistic history has now unveiled the 80 games out of a proposed pool of 240 that will be included in The Art of Video Games exhibit running from March 16, 2012 to September 30, 2012. While the winning games (PDF), as voted by gamers and art enthusiasts alike, are all stand-out titles, it goes without saying that this a huge step in the recognition of video games as artisitic masterpieces."

PyroMosh writes "NASA administrator Charles Bolden just announced the final homes for the four remaining Space Shuttle Orbiters in a ceremony at Kennedy Space Center today commemorating the 30th anniversary of the first Shuttle launch. The Shuttle Atlantis will remain at NASA's home of Shuttle Launch operations — Kennedy Space Center. Endeavour will be displayed at the California Science Center in Los Angeles, just miles from where she was assembled. Discovery will be moved to the Smithsonian's Udvar-Hazy Air and Space Museum in Virginia outside of Washington DC — the very hangar that Enterprise now occupies. Finally, the Shuttle airframe prototype Enterprise will be moved from her current home to the U.S.S. Intrepid Sea Air & Space Museum in New York City."

wiredog writes "The Atlantic reports the news that the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History has a new section of their website dedicated to documenting COBOL's history. An exhibit will open at the museum this spring."

Hugh Pickens writes "Researchers at the University of Rochester believe that a 35-mile rift in the desert of Ethiopia will likely become a new ocean in a million years or so, connecting the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden. Using newly gathered seismic data, researchers have reconstructed how the rift tore open along its entire 35-mile length in just days. Dabbahu, a volcano at the northern end of the rift, erupted first, then magma pushed up through the middle of the rift area and began 'unzipping' the rift in both directions. 'We know that seafloor ridges are created by a similar intrusion of magma into a rift, but we never knew that a huge length of the ridge could break open at once like this,' says Cindy Ebinger, professor of earth and environmental sciences at the University of Rochester. The results show that highly active volcanic boundaries along the edges of tectonic ocean plates may suddenly break apart in large sections, instead of in bits, as the leading theory had previously held. The sudden large-scale events pose a much more serious hazard to populations living near the rift than would several smaller events."

Matt_dk writes "Does a twin Earth exist somewhere in our galaxy? Astronomers are getting closer and closer to finding an Earth-sized planet in an Earth-like orbit. NASA's Kepler spacecraft just launched to find such worlds. Once the search succeeds, the next questions driving research will be: Is that planet habitable? Does it have an Earth-like atmosphere? Answering those questions will not be easy. 'We'll have to be really lucky to decipher an Earth-like planet's atmosphere during a transit event so that we can tell it is Earth-like,' said Kaltenegger. 'We will need to add up many transits to do so — hundreds of them, even for stars as close as 20 light-years away.'" The abstract of their paper offers a link to the complete paper as a 17-page PDF; here is a short description from 2007 of the same researchers' work, outlining the type of spectral signature that an Earth-like atmosphere would be expected to show.

You posted your questions for Herbert H. Thompson, PhD, on November 3rd and 4th. He decided to wait to answer until after the election in case there was a flagrant voting machine problem he could include in his answers -- and there has been at least one, but it is probably not a "security" problem per se, and is a long way from being resolved in any case. So here we go. Good food for thought here.

1) paper trail?
by ummit

This is a really basic question and it seems I should know an answer, but it never seems to be discussed: Why are the electronic voting machine companies generally so dead-set against emitting verifiable and auditable paper records? It can't just be cost, because they could and would just pass that on to their customers.

Hugh: In some states the debate has already been settled in that there is legislation in place requiring a voter-verified paper trail. Verifiedvoting.org has a good tracker of this here.

There are a few points often cited by groups resistant to a voter-verified paper trail. A first argument is that printers can fail. In touch-screen - Direct Record Electronic or DRE machines - printers are often the only components with moving parts (although some systems do have hard drives) which increases the risk of mechanical failure. Printers also bring issues like running out of paper, jams, misprints, etc. Another reason (cited less frequently) is the cost of paper/printing, but as you pointed out, this is a cost that can be passed on to counties.

Some election officials have also made the argument that they've already bought machines that don't have a paper trail and retrofitting existing machines would be costly and painful. I've also heard the argument that having a paper receipt doesn't matter because in most cases they won't be referenced.

I don't think that the sum of these arguments against a paper trail come any where near countering the necessity of having some sort of redundant recording mechanism. A critical system should always failover securely and a voter verified paper trail, if implemented properly, can meet that need for DRE machines.

2) Re:paper trail?
by Thansal

Sort of a follow up, how do the states/districts decide what machine to go with? Is it a standard "go with the lowest bidder", is this why we see such shoddy machines going into action? Do the decision making organizations tend to have specific features they look for? Anything else you would like to share about the decision making processes that you have seen?

Hugh: There are a couple of key things to keep in mind. First, there are only a few main machine suppliers. Second, the Help America Vote act (see http://www.fec.gov/hava/law_ext.txt) provided a ton of money to invest in electronic voting machines within a short (debatably unrealistic) timeframe. Given these two factors, the sales that I've seen have boiled down to readily visible machine elements like purchase price, how many other places have used the machines successfully, deployment cost, maintainability, ongoing service/maintenance cost, personal relationships, etc.

Generally, buyers of this technology aren't factoring in security: the machines pass certification lab tests but the testing doesn't cover security well (or at all). The National Institute of Standards (NIST) is working on certification procedures to address this very problem and the hope is that security will factor prominently into buying decisions made in the future. Hopefully existing machines will be retrofitted to meet those new standards too.

3) Largest Inherent Flaw?
by eldavojohn

In your opinion, what is the largest inherent flaw within electronic voting systems today? Diebold's been in the news for having many potential problems ranging from securing the physical hardware to the ability to hack the software or firmware. I'm sure you're quite prepared to pose a case against implementations but can you think of a more intuitive scheme (encryption, network layout, verification scheme) to protect against "hacking our democracy?"

Hugh: The biggest problem with e-voting isn't technical; it's procedural. Ignoring the perennial social voting issues (voter suppression, dead people voting, etc.) there's no real guidance given to elections administrators on how to safely and effectively use electronic voting equipment. If one has no idea what a memory card is, why would you bother trying to secure it?

One glaring example of bad procedure is 'sleepovers', a practice where voting machines are sent home with poll workers before an election to make the process of transporting them to polling places on election day easier (see http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9002204 for some info on this). If one were dealing with a box to hold ballots, 'sleepovers' wouldn't be a problem because the morning of the election a group of poll workers could inspect the box and verify that it was empty (including the old false bottom trick; see 'Stuffer's ballot box' at http://americanhistory.si.edu/vote/paperballots.html). If election officials knew the risks of tampering with some of these electronic voting machines (just search Slashdot for 'e-voting' for examples) then a voting machine sleepover suddenly seems like a pretty bad idea.

Right now we're at a point where election supervisors and poll workers are given a technology that they don't understand with little or no guidance on how to use that technology safely and securely. That's a recipe for serious risk, for voting or anything else.

4) Here is my question...
by Noryungi

Let's assume for a moment the 2006 US House/Senate election goes this way: Republicans keep control of both through a series of smallish victories, Democrats gain a few seats, and the results are explained away in the mainstream media as "fluke results", "margin of error", etc...

How do you prove that foul play (hacking) has been involved?

Do you even have a plan in place to check the results?

Please note that this is a very serious question. There was a saying, a few years back, that said a novice hacker is someone known in a small circle, a confirmed hacker is someone who is known all over the Internet, and a great hacker is someone who is totally invisible.

What if the election was subtly hacked, in a way that left lingering doubts (51%-vs-48% kind of results and all that), but no solid proof?

Hugh: First it's important to define e-voting security as a technology issue and not a partisan politics issue; what we've seen so far has been bad software and bad procedures to administer that software. Given the types of vulnerabilities that have been found, proving (and sometimes even detecting) foul play can be very difficult if the malicious person is skilled and the effect is minor (meaning a small percentage of the actual votes cast). For the types of vulnerabilities uncovered in some of the touch screens, optical scan readers, and backend tabulation systems, exploits can be written for some of them that are 'self erasing.' This means that the last executed bits of code can change things so that it looks like the original which could make slight tampering difficult to detect or prove in purely electronic systems. I think this argument speaks to the need for a voter-verified paper receipt so that there will be at least a good answer to the recount question.

5) OSS?
by Xzzy

Does the HBO show spend any time discussing the three "sides" to the debate? E-Voting, open sourced e-voting software, and paper voting? The last Slashdot article on this topic, when Diebold's complaint was announced, spent some time on this. The worry being, the debate is nothing more than "e-voting good" or "e-voting bad", ignoring the possibility that "open source e-voting" might be a viable middle ground.

How do you think open source could fit into this issue? Or should it?

Hugh: When it comes to voting, I'm not sure if it's a matter of open vs. closed source but instead a matter of standards and inspection by people who understand security. I'd be a fan of any solution, open or closed source, that allows trusted, knowledgeable, and independent software and hardware security practitioners the ability to inspect the systems and the code that runs them.

For example, I believe that there should be some sort of standards organization that is chartered with inspecting the system AND has proven security expertise to act as a representative of the people. For airplanes we put faith in FAA and airline carrier safety and security inspections. This kind of process has worked pretty well for a long time for machines that we place our trust in like airplanes, elevators, etc. but we're still a long way away from it in voting unfortunately. If the voting systems were open source, this may come automatically as a function of the 'citizen inspector' and might get us to where things should be faster but I think its still possible in a closed-source environment.

6) Pen-and-paper voting
by NetDanzr

What, exactly, is the argument against pen-and-paper voting? It seems to me that everybody wants to migrate to voting machines - electronic or mechanical - but so far nobody has explained to me what's wrong with good old-fashioned "put an X next to your candidate's name" voting.

Hugh: There are some pretty interesting (and legitimate) drivers behind e-voting and I'll go through the biggest.

The first is a push for disabled voters to be able cast their ballot using the same mechanism as able-bodied voters in a non-assisted way. Many states have mandated that machines must be able to service blind and illiterate voters and section 301 of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)requires that such facilities at least be available (see HAVA section 301 from http://www.fec.gov/hava/law_ext.txt). Most touch screen machines do this through audio output to a headphone jack.

Another driver is the desire to capture voter intent unambiguously. Every year thousands of votes aren't counted because there's some ambiguity in how the voter intended to vote. In pen and paper voting, someone can put Xs (or shaded-in ovals) next to two candidate names instead of one or make a stray mark on a paper ballot which may lead to some late night debates involving lawyers and magnifying glasses. One of the hopes for e-voting was to drastically reduce voter intent ambiguity by guaranteeing that someone couldn't vote for multiple candidates in the same race simultaneously.

Efficiency (theoretically) has been another driver, more so in counting than in the actual voting process itself.

The sum of these present a good case to at least rethink pen-and-paper as the answer but, as with any new system, care has to be taken that the solution fixes more problems than it creates.

7) Why is it so hard?
by gorbachev

As a software engineer I'm constantly amazed at how incompetent Diebold and other companies making e-voting applications appear to be. This stuff is not rocket science at all, but fairly uncomplicated, basic software engineering.

Why do you think it's so hard for Diebold and other companies to come up with solutions that work well? Is it a stubborn unwillingness to listen and learn from critics, sheer incompetence, or something else?

Hugh: We've certainly seen some pretty glaring security problems in voting machines that span touch screens, tabulators, and optical scan devices. We've really seen problems across vendors too. The biggest problem I think is that there's no real economic driver to make the systems more secure. The people that buy voting machines typically haven't discriminated based on the security quality of the machines because they have no visibility into it. It's like buying a car without something like consumer reports crash test ratings. Unless someone actually starts looking at machine security and comparing it then we're left to making buying decisions based on qualities we can see like purchase price, market share, and whatever unsubstantiated thing the vendor wants to tell us about features and quality. Even given some of the vulnerabilities that have been found, and supposedly fixed, we're still no better off. If you determine that company X has vulnerability Y in one of their voting systems who's to say if the competition's voting system is any better or worse? We are at the point now where we know the systems that have been looked at are sub-par with respect to security and hopefully that's enough to spur consumers (counties that buy the machines) to start asking some tough questions to vendors about security and get us to a place where they can factor security quality into their buying decisions.

8) On Open vs. Closed Networks
by the-banker

It has always seemed to me that the real Achilles heel of e-voting is the networked approach that most vendors have taken. With a networked approach, fraud can be perpetrated on a mass scale if entry is gained at one weakness.

As a former election judge, I have enough experience to know that rigging a paper election is a daunting, nearly impossible task, as there are literally thousands of ballot boxes that would have to be compromised for any sort of advantage (on a state or national scale).

Are these concerns balanced (or even discussed) when officials are purchasing equipment? Do local Board of Elections have not only the expertise, but the concern to ask the right questions? And how do BoE directors react when they hear about your concerns and research?

Hugh: I agree that networking machines together is a serious risk certainly from a scale-of-attack perspective and unfortunately some counties continue to modem in results from polling places using procedures that are insecure.

I think the bigger issue is visibility and awareness; election officials just aren't given procedural guidance on how to administer the systems securely. The result is risk and I think many of these risks aren't weighed with the proper magnitude by election officials because it's unfamiliar territory. I think that most Board of Elections officials are good people who want to do the right thing but just don't know what questions to ask vendors about security and don't know how to interpret their answers. This isn't just a problem in voting, it's a problem with software security in general and I think it's important that if you're investing heavily in a software-based solution that you ask hard questions about security. I think a good starter set of questions to throw at software vendors (voting or otherwise) is:

• What process improvements have you made as a result of vulnerabilities reported in your software?
• What is your patch release (or update) strategy?
• Have you had an external (and reputable) security auditing or penetration testing firm evaluate your system? Can we see a summary of their report?
• Can we have our own security auditing firm evaluate your system?
• Do you have a dedicated team to assess and respond to security vulnerability reports in your products?
• What is your vulnerability response process?
• What training do your development and testing groups receive on security?
• What percentage of your test team is focused on security?
• What are the terms and period of your security support agreement?
• Do you offer security training, documentation or guidance to people that will be operating your system?

This list is by no means comprehensive but the answers will likely be illuminating. Some of the questions rely on vendor forthrightness while others use external validation. With someone technical and software security savvy on the team that's evaluating vendors though, you can get a good feel for how vendor answers compare with each other. The long term hope is that we'll have decent security standards for voting systems that are enforced. The National Institute of Standards (NIST) is making progress here and I look forward to the results.

9) The greatest threat to e-voting?
by sharkb8

Do you think the greatest threat of an e-voting system being hijacked is during the voting itself, with one or more people influencing things at the polling place, during the processing, with untrained, nonaccountable poll workers and supervisors, or do you think a greater threat would be someone maliciously attacking an electronic vote counting repository/database?

Hugh: In terms of attack, the greatest risk is still probably a people risk; and that has existed for a long time. The concern with e-voting is that some of the vulnerabilities found make it so that the number of folks that would have to be involved to tamper with results is fewer than before and that their efforts may scale. From that perspective I think there's risk at each stage of the process from how voter registration databases are stored and secured, to how they are cast on election day, to when they get aggregated at the central tabulator. The 'riskiest' piece of the process actually varies from state to state and county to county based on the procedures they have around security. In some places the biggest threat may exist in registration databases that are stored on unprotected servers. In other counties risk may come from poll workers that election officials know very little about who are allowed to take voting machines home the night before elections to make the setup process easier the next day. In others, the biggest risk might lay in the central tabulator which is housed in an unlocked room, where many people enter and exit throughout the day.

Many of these risks could be reduced by poll worker training and procedural change on how machines are operated and secured.

10) Is the Harm Really that Great?
by logicnazi

I am saddened and dismayed by the poor engineering and ignorance of basic security practices that our electronic voting machines show. However, is this really something we should panic about or even the biggest problem in our election system?

All voting systems are vulnerable to fraud. What makes these electronic systems different is that one or a very small number of individuals can engineer a fraud. However, their ability to execute a fraud is limited by the media polls (we will suspect something if the results are inexplicably different than polled) and knowledge of precinct history. Thus the danger from individuals changing the vote seems to really be that they will shift a close race (say 10% apart) one way or another.

However, this sort of shifting close races doesn't greatly degrade the structural force of voting. All candidates will still try to enact policies to garner support whether they need 50% of the votes or only 45%. Much of voting is random, affected by things like personal charisma rather than policy questions so clearly the system doesn't work because we always have the person who 50% want but rather it works because of the structural pressure not to stray too far from what the people want. Or to put it in political science terms, what does all the work is the tendency of all candidates to shift to the middle so in the long run who actually wins each race isn't so important.

But now comparing the potential for electronic vote fraud to things like machine politics (with conventional ballot stuffing), safe districts, voter disenfranchisement efforts, felon lists etc.. etc.. it doesn't seem like it is such a big deal. Making sure the polling places in the inner city don't have enough machines has a much bigger structural effect, by making sure one group's votes don't count at all, than just giving one candidate a random 10% of the vote. Creating a safe district removes virtually all of the structural pressure of voters on government and it seems far more effective and less dangerous to accidentally strike the wrong people from the rolls or put too few voting machines in some precincts.

In short are we letting our concern over the technology of voting blind us to the bigger issues? Shouldn't we be paying more attention to who gets to vote, how districts are drawn and other conventional aspects of voting than to the potential for individuals to electronically cheat?

Hugh: I think that the flaws we've seen with electronic voting are only a piece of the problem and that the largest issues we have in voting are people ones. The technical flaws, though, may amplify some of the classic people threats. As you pointed out, some of the vulnerabilities may allow a malicious person's actions to scale or may mean that a smaller number of people to have a bigger influence. Even just within the space of e-voting security I'd argue that many of the risks that come from machine vulnerabilities can be greatly reduced if we had some sound broad procedures/education around using and administering the machines securely.

The voting process has always posed some significant challenges. E-voting security is a small piece of the larger problem. It is a piece that we know we can do something about, though, by establishing some basic security assessment standards for the machines themselves and some procedural and education standards for those that administer elections. The biggest sin would be that e-voting vulnerabilities merit a prominent place on the laundry list of voting problems in years to come. I think we're at a point where some simple things can be done to move it off that list and I hope that some of the standards efforts that have begun now in earnest get rolled out so attention can be focused on other ongoing voting challenges.

iamlucky13 writes "After having inspired space enthusiasts around the world and possibly setting the stage for space tourism by winning the X-Prize a year ago, SpaceShipOne is on it's way to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC. There it will join other historic craft such as Lindbergh's Spirit of St. Louis and Yeager's Glamorous Glennis. The exhibit will be unveiled on October 5th at a ceremony with Burt Rutan of Scaled Composites, the company that built SpaceShipOne, and Paul Allen, the Microsoft co-founder who funded the project."

Neil Halelamien writes "In a recent interview with the Desert Sun, Burt Rutan talks about the future of SpaceShipOne and SpaceShipTwo. The bad news is that SpaceShipOne will be retired straight to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum, despite getting five different requests to fly suborbital payloads. The good news is that efforts are being focused on SpaceShipTwo, which will carry nine people, and fly higher and further downrange than SpaceShipOne. Virgin Galactic will purchase a fleet of five of these vehicles, which will start test flights in 2007. Virgin Galactic may end up competing with Jeff Bezos's Blue Origin, which is rumored to be developing a VTOL suborbital vehicle. Also interesting to watch will be Rutan's involvement with t/Space, one of the companies contracted by NASA to conduct concept studies for the Vision for Space Exploration."

loid_void writes "Reutersis is reporting that a giant Apollo moon rocket that never got off the ground is about to get a face-lift after years of rusting away in the Texas heat and humidity at the Johnson Space Center. Workers will construct a shelter for the Saturn V rocket and give it the equivalent of a "blow dry" in the first steps to preserve the relic of NASA's golden age, said Allan Needell, Apollo program curator for the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum. The 363-foot-long behemoth has lain on its side in front of JSC since 1977, a favorite sight of tourists, but also a victim of the elements. Instead of launching astronauts to the moon as it was built to do, it has become a slowly fading hulk of peeling paint and corroded metal where birds live and plants sprout, Needell said on Wednesday during a visit to the rocket. "There's a lot of biology growing on there," he said, pointing out streaks of algae staining the rocket's white skin."

loid_void writes "Reutersis is reporting that a giant Apollo moon rocket that never got off the ground is about to get a face-lift after years of rusting away in the Texas heat and humidity at the Johnson Space Center. Workers will construct a shelter for the Saturn V rocket and give it the equivalent of a "blow dry" in the first steps to preserve the relic of NASA's golden age, said Allan Needell, Apollo program curator for the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum. The 363-foot-long behemoth has lain on its side in front of JSC since 1977, a favorite sight of tourists, but also a victim of the elements. Instead of launching astronauts to the moon as it was built to do, it has become a slowly fading hulk of peeling paint and corroded metal where birds live and plants sprout, Needell said on Wednesday during a visit to the rocket. "There's a lot of biology growing on there," he said, pointing out streaks of algae staining the rocket's white skin."

loid_void writes "Reutersis is reporting that a giant Apollo moon rocket that never got off the ground is about to get a face-lift after years of rusting away in the Texas heat and humidity at the Johnson Space Center. Workers will construct a shelter for the Saturn V rocket and give it the equivalent of a "blow dry" in the first steps to preserve the relic of NASA's golden age, said Allan Needell, Apollo program curator for the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum. The 363-foot-long behemoth has lain on its side in front of JSC since 1977, a favorite sight of tourists, but also a victim of the elements. Instead of launching astronauts to the moon as it was built to do, it has become a slowly fading hulk of peeling paint and corroded metal where birds live and plants sprout, Needell said on Wednesday during a visit to the rocket. "There's a lot of biology growing on there," he said, pointing out streaks of algae staining the rocket's white skin."

loid_void writes "Reutersis is reporting that a giant Apollo moon rocket that never got off the ground is about to get a face-lift after years of rusting away in the Texas heat and humidity at the Johnson Space Center. Workers will construct a shelter for the Saturn V rocket and give it the equivalent of a "blow dry" in the first steps to preserve the relic of NASA's golden age, said Allan Needell, Apollo program curator for the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum. The 363-foot-long behemoth has lain on its side in front of JSC since 1977, a favorite sight of tourists, but also a victim of the elements. Instead of launching astronauts to the moon as it was built to do, it has become a slowly fading hulk of peeling paint and corroded metal where birds live and plants sprout, Needell said on Wednesday during a visit to the rocket. "There's a lot of biology growing on there," he said, pointing out streaks of algae staining the rocket's white skin."

An anonymous reader writes "20 years after the Seiko TV watch, another Asian firm has given it another go. The Globe and Mail in Canada got their hands on the NHJ TV Watch and have posted a review. The writer thinks it's still just way too huge to be a watch but is still impressed."

Alert Slashdot reader jamie pointed out a story in Smithsonian Magazine on the subject of listening to the sounds cells make in order to detect abnormalities.

tripmaster writes "I'm lucky enough to have been asked to assemble and moderate a panel at the Smithsonian on May 16th; so I asked myself, who can I ask, given the cachet of an invite to speak at the Smithsonian (prior speakers: Berners-Lee, Cerf, Gates, Streep, Albright, etc.)? We ended up choosing Shigeru Miyamoto for console gaming, Richard Garfield for pen and paper games, Doug Church for PC games. /.-ers in the DC area (or on the East coast) should come see the panel, which will be a meaty 2-3 hours. I'm looking forward to asking questions and getting out of the way -- I think their cross-talk could be especially interesting. It's the weekend after the E3 Expo, which is probably the only time Miyamoto's in the States and available -- hopefully he'll also bring his E3 demos to show." Although a little pricey at $40, this is certainly a rare chance to see game design legends, particularly Miyamoto, in a roundtable.

dpbsmith writes "Nerds will herald the re-release of a remarkable recording from the fifties: "Out Of This World," a twofer comprising "Earthquakes Around the World" and "Ionospheric Swishes, Whistlers, Tweeks; The Dawn Chorus." Smithsonian Folkways, in addition to the Folkways titles, also acquired the Cook Laboratories "Road Recordings" series. For a reasonable fee they will burn and send you a nicely labeled and packaged CD-R of any of the recordings in their catalog." Read on for a description of some of the interesting audio now available.

"Among the Cook recordings, not listed in their online catalog but available nonetheless (telephone 1-888-FOLKWAYS) is Cook Laboratories Catalog Number 5012. The Smithsonian's internal listing calls it simply "Earthquake," but it is actually a full transcription "Out of This World," with earthquakes on a 20-minute-long track 1 and ionospheric noises on a 20-minute-long track 2.

"Earthquake" is not an audio recording of the actual sounds that would be heard by a human being on an earthquake site. It is more cerebral than that.

In the 1950s, Hugo Benioff of CalTech devised a seismometer that recorded seismometer data on analog tape at a speed of 0.02 inches per second. The "Earthquakes" side delivers of the results of playing these tapes at standard playback speeds, speeding them up by factors of 187 to 750 times normal speed and converting subsonic earthquake vibrations into audible sound. The results are intriguing, indescribable, and curious to hear. Nearby earthquakes have a fairly sharp and brittle sound; distant ones sound dull and echoey.

The original LP contains a very strange track in which an earthquake recording is reproduced "to within 2 or 3 times original speed" and at a high amplitude. The narration notes that you will not be able to hear much of anything, but if you bend over and watch the tonearm you will be able to see it move. In fact, few tonearms, apparently including the one used by the Smithsonian to transcribe this segment, are able to play this band without skipping grooves.

The second side of the LP, "Sounds from the ionosphere," records the sounds that are heard when an antenna, with its signal suitably filtered, is connected to an amplifier rather than to a radio receiving set. The propagation characteristics of the ionosphere cause different audio frequencies to propagate at different speeds. The result is that the impulse created by a static discharge is heard, not as a click, but as a descending or ascending whistle. The sounds on this recordings are strange, melodious--almost like a mass of birds or spring peepers--and literally unearthly.

(If the ionospheric noises on Cook catalog #5012 are not enough, the Smithsonian also has Cook catalog #5013. This is a stereo recording combining ionospheric noises recorded simultaneously in Hanover, NH and Washington, D. C.)"

N8TWJ writes "The International Telecommunications Union has decided to bring Morse Code into the 21st century by adding the loved (or hated?) - at (@) symbol. Lets hope the spammers don't start sniffing 20 meters for da-dit-da-dit-dah-dit..." According to the article, Paul Rinaldo, chief technical officer for the American Radio Relay League, says: "It's a pretty big deal... there certainly hasn't been any change [in Morse Code characters] since before World War II."

Veeru writes "As mentioned on Nova, my great-great-grandfather Amos Ives Root published the first eye witness account of the Wright Brothers flight almost 100 years ago. Scientific American had rejected his article as 'unbelievable' and 'having no practical application'. The secretive Wright Brothers allowed Amos to publish the article in his own Gleanings Bee magazine instead. Because of his objective account, other experimenters may not have received the credit they deserved. I recently realized that Amos was intent on investigating the highest tech advances of the day and that the airplane was the most advanced phenomenon he could find. If Amos were alive today, what obscure technology would he be pursuing?"

Paul03244 writes "I found a fascinating Smithsonian Institute page about snail mail technology, part of the SI's National Postal Museum. Great stuff; everything from 'perforating paddles' used during the process of fumigating mail during the Yellow Fever epidemic of the 1880s; to a number of items used in Rural Mail Delivery. A great page to make us realize that even a dialup Internet connection is a great improvement over what our forebears were accustomed to just a generation or two ago."

Paul03244 writes "I found a fascinating Smithsonian Institute page about snail mail technology, part of the SI's National Postal Museum. Great stuff; everything from 'perforating paddles' used during the process of fumigating mail during the Yellow Fever epidemic of the 1880s; to a number of items used in Rural Mail Delivery. A great page to make us realize that even a dialup Internet connection is a great improvement over what our forebears were accustomed to just a generation or two ago."

Paul03244 writes "I found a fascinating Smithsonian Institute page about snail mail technology, part of the SI's National Postal Museum. Great stuff; everything from 'perforating paddles' used during the process of fumigating mail during the Yellow Fever epidemic of the 1880s; to a number of items used in Rural Mail Delivery. A great page to make us realize that even a dialup Internet connection is a great improvement over what our forebears were accustomed to just a generation or two ago."

An anonymous reader points out that the Serious Games Project, which is part of the Woodrow Wilson International Center For Scholars at the Smithsonian, has just submitted a call for academic papers. They're interested in discussing problems such as "what public policy and management issues or challenges are most amenable to computer-based gaming techniques?", and there is already a very interesting Chris Crawford-written paper on the site, "Subjectivity And Simulation" (PDF link).

aheath writes "The New York Times has a story about the 30th anniversary of the Xerox Alto computer: How Digital Pioneers Put the 'Personal' in PC's. According to the PARC Factsheet "The Alto Computer (1973/1980) included the Graphical User Interface (GUI), WYSIWYG editing, bit-mapped display, overlapping windows, and the first commercial use of the mouse." The concepts prototyped in the Xerox Alto contributed to the development of the Xerox Star, the Apple Lisa, the Apple Macintosh and Microsoft Windows 1.0."

BrianGa writes "This BBC article reports on a skull which scientists say is the most important discovery in the search for the origins of humankind since the first Australopithecus ape-man remains were found in Africa in the 1920s. The newly discovered skull finally puts to rest any idea that there might be a single missing link between humans and chimpanzees, they say. Analysis of the ancient find is not yet complete, but already it is clear that it has an apparently puzzling combination of modern and ancient features."

peterwayner writes: "Everyone has heard stories of odd coincidences from cousins who call each other simultaneously or professors making the same discovery, but there may be no better proof of synchronicity than Steven Spielberg's charcoal grey rendering of Philip Kindred Dick's short story, "Minority Report." This tale of police who solve crimes before they are committed reached the theaters just a few weeks after the United States learned that even citizens are being locked up without a trial or a lawyer because they might turn out to be terrorists." Read the rest of his review below.

The resonance between this story and the current war is so strong that it's almost impossible to watch it for what it is, a good murder mystery conceived well before September 11th retelling a short story that was published long ago in 1956. The movie is half a work of philosophy and half a head-scratching what-if narrative exploring the merger of computers, extra-sensory perception, and genetic research. All of this is painted on the screen in the sad muted browns, sepias, blues and greys of an amateur watercolorist who can't keep the colors from turning to mud.

The conceit is the kind of classic conundrum that made science fiction great: the police in 2054 can tap the minds of three "pre-cogs" who see visions of murders a few hours before they will happen. Tom Cruise plays a cop who flies off in a jet pack to nab the soon-to-be-bad guys and lock them away before they kill. Can we really be sure the crime will be committed just as the pre-cognitives predict? Cruise is an earnest believer in the system's perfection until, it should be obvious, the system implicates him in the pre-murder of someone he's never met.

The yarn unfolds as a long string of chase scenes mixed with some flashbacks and some pre-cognitive dodges. Cruise's character, we're told, is a fast runner and he spends plenty of time running fast. The plot is crisp and layered enough to unfold several times. The hinge points are as good as the philosophical question they serve.

The biggest failure of the movie may be the set design and the look. At one moment, we see computers to inspire the next generation from Apple, in another moment we're in a mall that isn't as fancy or as new as the mall around the corner from my house. The logos for the Gap and Pepsi haven't changed since they were faxed over from the product-placement department. Many of the scenes look contemporary, with minimal set dressing, but then along comes a great car chase tricked out like the wet dream from some 19-year-old in an art school in Southern California. The unity of vision that delivered the oily dystopia of Bladerunner is missing this time. I wouldn't be surprised if someone tightened the budget screws in the middle of the film and sent them scrambling to save money on some scenes.

The tone coming from the actors is also a bit uneven. Spielberg managed to toss in funny moments in the Indiana Jones trilogy and whole schtick came together with the amazing certainty of comic-book escapism. The bits of humor in this movie's chase scenes, though, ruin the nervous paranoia and amped-up tension crackling through the narrative's ganglia. Is this supposed to be summer joy ride or a serious exploration of the meaning of justice?

These errors in execution don't matter too much because the storyline is so strong and central to our current struggle with terrorism. No one probably wants to hear that Dick wrote this story just a few years after the Supreme Court finally decided that it wasn't really legal to lock up Japanese-Americans on the off chance that they might take their orders from Tokyo. The movie theater where I saw the film is only a few miles from the prison that held much of Baltimore's City Council during the Civil War.

Despite the uncomfortable fact that moments like these happen again and again in history, there's no way to escape wondering whether Spielberg is some kind of pre-cog being who gets his version of the zeitgeist delivered early. The timing is just eerie.

Peter Wayner thinks his new book, Translucent Databases is about ten years ahead of its time. His book about steganography, Disappearing Cryptography , may be a few months late."

scubacuda writes "Science@NASA has an article on how cells respond to gravity in unexpected ways. Cell skeletons ("cytoskeletons") consist of protein molecules arranged into chains very much like Kenneth Snelson's Needletower , a tensegrity (tension gravity) sculpture built in 1969. This tension is what makes red blood cells flat and human endothelial cell filaments' geodesic-domes triangular-shaped."

Ben Sawyer writes: "The Woodrow Wilson Center's Foresight and Governance Project has published Serious Games: Improving Public Policy through Game-Based Learning and Simulation, a whitepaper. The paper illustrates how government agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can utilize game-based techniques, technologies, and approaches to produce innovative simulations, models, and game-based learning products that enhance public policy decisions. The Woodrow Wilson Center is distributing the paper on-line to a variety of agencies, organizations, and game developers to help foster greater discussion and cooperation between key public policy makers and game developers. Interested readers can find the homepage for the paper here."

fm6 writes: "Just the thing to remind an aging geek of his mortality: this week marks the 30th anniversary of the Intel 4004, the very first microprocessor. Another historical page here, and a column bemoaning the absence of dancing in the streets here. Trivia -- why 4004? Because it was the fourth component in a 4-bit chipset." You might want to read the interview with Ted Hoff from a few months ago, it's pretty informative about the origins of the 4004.

rchatterjee writes "Cray, the only mainstream recognizeable name in supercomputing, has been busy lately. Their totally new MTA-2 supercomputer design will use a UltraSPARC-III powered Sun Fire 6800 server to just feed the data to the MTA-2's processor. They're also refocussing on Vector Supercomputers and are going to release their first new vector supercomputer since Tera Computing bought them, the SV-2 in 2002. And if that wasn't enough they have a deal with API networks to develop Alpha processor based Beowulf clusters of Linux machines that as a cluster will run the same operating system as Cray's T3E supercomputers. Seymour Cray would be proud. You can get a quick overview of all the latest Cray developments from this article on Cnet."

Jenny Stevens writes "A group of courageous third graders and their science teacher have decided to try to correct "errors" by the mighty Smithsonian Institution. They are trying to give proper credit to Nikola Tesla (he is my favorite scientist of all time) and his inventions. They have started a campaign and have mailed hundreds of executives of major American corporations asking for donations to their campaign. They have even received a donation from the CEO of Sony Corp. in Japan. To read more, check their Web page. For an intro to Tesla and his contributions check this page."