Apropos for the previous post (on Darwinian adaptation among malware), the article itself attracted one of those keyword-matching comments from an apparent spamblog (somewhat different from straightforward splogs). I had not previously heard of these before operating this blog in other than stealth mode, so here’s how I infer they function just by observation:

1. A new post is scanned, either via its feed or one of the aggregator services like Technorati, looking for certain keywords.
2. A corresponding post is created on the spamblog with a generic blurb like “[author] had an interesting post about [keyword]” and a short 1- or 2-line excerpt centering on the keyword match.
3. A comment is submitted to the originating blog, linking back to the spamblog.
4. The spamblog post is then able to attract traffic either through clickthroughs from the comments thread, or from increased PageRank from Google since their blog gradually increases its network of keyword-linked sites.

The ultimate purpose is still simply to gain visitors which in turn trigger ad revenue through a combination of Google text ads, banner ads, and other pay-to-host content. The spamblog itself is often a default template, e.g. the Kubrick WordPress theme, consisting only of these short linked posts. For blogs that either don’t moderate comments or who don’t scrutinize excerpting sites individually, growth is mostly automatic. The adaptation is that they propagate links without the prior telltale markers of comment spam like overt sales messages included in the actual comment text.

So far I’ve seen these keyword comments triggered by an unusual set of terms: ‘elevator operator,’ ‘turquoise jewelry,’ a ’sequel to 5 People You Meet in Heaven,’ ‘Apple,’ ‘zebrafish,’ and ‘plumbing license.’ As an exercise for the reader, I leave it to you to guess which original posts generated each of those matches (hint: keywords don’t have to be sequential). I’m also curious whether having listed those now all together, I will get a repeat entry of all prior spam comment attempts.

This brings to mind what I am sure has already been codified into the equivalent of Sturgeon’s Law, which would go something like: “Any sufficiently popular mainstream communications system will generate spam” or perhaps the more prescriptive, “A communication system can be considered mainstream once it attracts spam.” Spam is generally considered to have originated with electronic systems like e-mail and Usenet forums, but extending the definition backwards, one could potentially designate parallels like telemarketing and robocalls for telephones and junk mail for postal service as examples. Did telegraph operators ever suffer from unsolicited commercial Morse Code transmissions? Certainly spam has gained tremendous genetic diversity in jumping to every emerging communication form—chat spam (first IRC then IM), forum spam (first newsgroups then web), mobile phone spam via SMS, online games, search engines (aka spamdexing), blog spam, and even video-sharing sites like YouTube. Twitter? Check.

Part of the original blame can be placed on the idealism of academic groups like the IETF who established standards for communication protocols like SMTP and NNTP without incorporating more robust authentication and authorization to deter spoofing and other common tactics. Except, of course, that those standards were created long before the very notion of a commercial Internet had been considered, and the online community was small enough to police itself by etiquette alone. Certainly we could assert that newer protocols should learn the lessons of the past and instill greater protection against potential abuses, right? Except, instead, the rapid evolution of spam in response to antispam efforts has created ’superbugs’ and an extensive evolutionary toolbox of techniques that can thwart most any systemic precaution. Just like our immune system and pharmacology have developed to deal with ever more sophisticated organic threats, inspiring ever stronger virii and bacteria, so the race continues between platform developers and those who would distribute spam over them. It is effectively now almost impossible to create a communications system that is actually usable, capable of reaching mainstream acceptance, and totally immune to spam-like behavior. Instead, like the common cold, we now aim instead to reach a détente where we can take steps to prevent infection and minimize symptoms, but no longer envision a ‘cure for spam.’

Steven Poole is one of many to engage in that promotion du jour, giving away a digital copy of a product—in his case, a book called Trigger Happy about the aesthetics of videogames, a topic which would naturally appeal to an online audience. Six months and 31,100 downloads later, he follows up the experiment with a compelling review of the state of media online and what the future may hold for various creators, notably musicians and writers.

His response is noteworthy for encapsulating many of the issues facing creators who wish (or face pressure) to distribute their works online, especially unfettered by Digital Rights Management (DRM) and preferably free. In the giveaway economy, as with the dotcom bubble before it, how exactly does that lead to sustainable income? Not all doom and gloom, Poole notes the promotional upsides in terms of wider distribution and thus ’seeding the market’ for possible hard-copy sales and future endeavors. However, the Paypal tip jar approach as attempted by many donation-supported software projects, Stephen King’s abortive The Plant, and Radiohead’s experiment with In Rainbows bears out the online form of tragedy of the commons where free access to a resource cannibalizes paid support for it. Without adequate volunteered funds as recompense, Poole summarizes the stark options remaining:

“If the breathless advocates of “the free distribution of ideas” are serious, they need either a) to come up with a realistic proposal as to how I am to keep feeding myself while giving the fruits of my labours away for free; or b) come out and say honestly that they don’t think any such thing as a “professional writer” ought to exist, and that I should just get a job like anyone else.”

He goes on to describe the common rejoinder (termed the “Slashdot argument”) that free content can be subsidized by correlative sales, like live shows, T-shirts, and service contracts. While his reaction to this position is somewhat kneejerk (essentially “you try working for free!”) it does underscore the difficult proposition facing anyone who sees the future purely as online free distribution: just how do you offset the production of an album, a book, a videogame if the audience demands that the primary work be free while you try to make up the difference in low attach-rate items like T-shirts and strategy guides? He also outlines the difficulty facing anyone trying to follow in the footsteps of the Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails offerings, namely that both earned their fanbase “through the nasty old music-industry business model” while the possibility of an unknown band reaping the same rewards still begs the question on opt-in payment. Plus, how many other bands will garner the same level of press coverage that in turn drives the traffic once the novelty wears off?

(more…)

In light of new coverage of the ongoing legal battle between J.K. Rowling and HP Lexicon, I thought I would do a quick survey of recent Harry Potter news.
(more…)

The expression of April Fools’ Day has taken on extra dimensions with the proliferation of the web hoax, and has developed far enough to generate a pronounced backlash (if there’s one thing the Internet does better than anything else, it’s backlash.) (more…)

The Trip

My close friend Atuarre had to make an abrupt move from St. Louis across the country in order to care for his family in California. Flying in on Monday, he had to make all arrangements, pack, and leave by Thursday in order to make it back before the following Monday. I went along to help out and share the driving. Google Maps provided us with 3 routes, and we chose the most southerly, given that a massive ice storm had just blanketed Oklahoma and other parts of the Midwest. We also chose to avoid Las Vegas and the narrow mountain pass from Reno, given that we would be driving a truck pulling a car trailer. This route required over 2,000 miles of driving.

Rather than any kind of travelogue, which would be largely hampered by the conditions in which we drove (dark, fog, sleep deprivation) and the time pressure, I thought I would instead compile a few things we learned along the way.

(more…)

In a provocative yet sensible thought experiment, David Foster Wallace asks if the American idea(l) is still considered worth the price of innocent lives, if “ours is a generation of Americans called to make great sacrifices in order to preserve our democratic way of life” as is frequently heralded in our history for past generations. While it is always easier to consider any sacrifice in the abstract, the quick rejoinder to Wallace’s notion - that the Americans who died on 9/11 could be considered a fair trade, the martyrs for our freedoms - is to dismiss it as tasteless and disrespectful. Yet how else can we penetrate the shroud of rhetoric that surrounds the War On Terror in the inviolable tones of righteousness? With the very meaning of ‘freedom’ diluted with its repetition as the basis for exchanging civil liberties (freedoms to) in return for the promise of protection from further attacks (freedom from), Wallace invokes the Benjamin Franklin caution that, “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

(more…)

Lately, I see systems. This is less Sixth Sense and more Little Man Tate, although without the glowing blue lines or floating numerals. Simply put, subjects that previously held no interest for me - politics (particularly political rhetoric), international relations, macroeconomics, business organization - are suddenly fascinating because they share a common platform of complex systems. This revelation ought perhaps to come as little surprise, given the predilection among the geek set for the systematic and ordered. In a post detailing aspects of the nerd psyche (with workarounds!), Rands describes the obsession with systems as a coping mechanism. For example, the nerd “sees the world as a system which, given enough time and effort, is completely knowable. This is a fragile illusion that your nerd has adopted, but it’s a pleasant one that gets your nerd through the day.” This system-centric perspective is also broadly attributed as the cause for abnormal geek socialization, since most social conversation is not directly results-oriented (I once gave up on conversational segues, much to the bewilderment of my interlocutors, before reading S.I. Hayakawa’s Language in Thought and Action). Likewise it could explain the attraction of conspiracy theories, which neatly knit together compelling fact or fact-like statements to make a reassuring whole that explains some otherwise puzzling event.

(more…)

The Kindle announcement has been echoed by hundreds of pronouncements about its eventual impact, ranging from the revolutionary “Re-inventing the book” to sneering condemnations that it will have the same negligible impact on ‘real books’ as all the previous e-book readers have to date. Here is a cross-sample of some of the more interesting, each of which carries a different emphasis re: the design, the service, the restrictions, etc.

(more…)

For the record, I have not used or even seen an Amazon Kindle yet, so this is not a bona fide product review. These impressions are based on the ideas presented by Amazon and the Newsweek article about how the Kindle is supposed to operate, and what the future may hold for similar devices versus its progenitor, the humble book.

(more…)

With Deathly Hallows out awhile, the Harry Potter omnivore has moved on to movie news, JK Rowling pronouncements, and social commentary. These have trickled in at various times since the final book’s release, not necessarily in this order. (more…)