How good software makes us more stupider

(poor grammar intentional)

Interesting story on the BBC site that the better software is, the less we think and the poorer our problem solving skills become. It had an interesting bit about London cabbies: the part of their brain that deals with spatial reasoning, i.e. city maps, is much better developed than most people. They have to pass a test showing that they know the city before they can get their license, and they have to do it from memory: no GPS satnav device. It would be interesting to know if they've ever been studied as a group for onset of dementia and Alzheimers as they age to see if their rate differs significantly from the general population.

I can partially agree with the conclusion:
Mr Carr says that this simple experiment could suggest that as computer software becomes easier to use, making complicated tasks easier, we risk losing the ability to properly learn something - in effect "short-circuiting" the brain.

"When you think about how we're coming to depend on software for all sorts of intellectual chores, for finding information, for socialising - you need to start worrying that it's not giving us, as individuals, enough room to act for ourselves."

I qualify it with 'partially' because the test that they performed can't be applied universally across all life, and they state that it was a simple experiment specifically about software. In my job, as a database administrator, I need to know how to do the most important parts of my job, and I need to know how to quickly find what I don't know how to do exactly off-hand. I don't need to immediately know how to set up replication as this is not something done on a regular basis, but I can find it quickly and get the job done pretty efficiently nonetheless.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11263559

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/09/13/1342209/How-Good-Software-Makes-Us-Stupid

64-bit Windows can now be infected with root kits!

My boss sends out interesting bits of tid occasionally, this is one such:

--Rootkit Infects 64-bit Windows
(August 26, 27 & 30, 2010)
Researchers have detected a variant of the TDL3 rootkit that is capable of infecting 64-bit Windows installations. TDL3, also known as Alureon, was the culprit behind a rash of Windows crashes that occurred after users installed a particular Windows patch earlier this year. Microsoft released a new version of the patch that detected whether the rootkit was there and offered help in removing the malware from users' computers. The significance of the rootkit infecting 64-bit windows is that the 64-bit versions are considered to be more secure than 32-bit versions. The new version of this particular rootkit has been detected in the wild.

http://www.esecurityplanet.com/features/article.php/3900936/New-64-Bit-Windows-Rootkit-Already-In-The-Wild.htm

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24720761-1st-x64compatible-kernel-mode-rootkit-infection-in-the-wild

http://blog.emagined.com/2010/08/30/what-next-a-64-bit-windows-rootkit/

[Editor's Note (Schultz): This is a very significant and negative development. 64-bit Windows systems have until the most recent version of TDL3 been resistant to rootkit infections, primarily because of two Windows OS protections: 1. A digital signature check prevents malicious drivers from getting into kernel memory, and 2. Windows Kernel Patch Protection keeps kernel mode drivers from making changes in the Windows kernel. The fact that this rootkit can bypass these two protections means that Pandora's Box has just been opened with respect to malware in 64-bit Windows systems.]

Emphasis mine. About the only way to guarantee that a computer cannot be infected is to never connect it to a network, much less the internet, and never install any software on it. Kinda limits its usefulness, though.

First sale doctrine gets tossed

This really sucks. Once upon a time a guy tried to sell some copies of AutoCad on eBay. They had been legally purchased. They were no longer being used on the computers that they had been bought for. You'd think there's no problem with this, right?

Wrong.

It used to be that we had something called First Sale Doctrine. Basically: you buy something from me, and you now own it, and I have no say what you subsequently do after I'm paid. It applies to books, movies, cars, whatever. The maker of AutoCad, Autodesk, sued. And now, unless this gets overturned by a higher court, you may never be able to buy used copies of software, music, movies, etc. Heck, this could affect used book stores.

And yet another bizarre aspect of this is the concept of shrinkwrap click-through licenses. The guy who was trying to sell them had never opened or installed the software, therefore had never agreed to any sort of contract with Autodesk.

This sucks. The ruling directly applies to computer software but could easily be applied to other media.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/first-sale-doctrine/

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/09/10/210243/Court-Says-First-Sale-Doctrine-Doesnt-Apply-To-Licensed-Software