backward engineering

Posted by Sergio Yepes | Sat Jun 22nd 2002 1 a.m.

I've been asking the same question to my self for a while, now I
  • marc garrett | Sat Jun 22nd 2002 1 a.m.
    Hi there Andres,

    Your worries about bad companies, governments exploiting DNA as an open
    source code, I believe is a very valid question. One only has to look at the
    companies that have already ruined living eco environments constantly for
    profit, global control. And they do not seem that bothered, other than as a
    marketing ploy to genuinely deal with such issues. Oil companies have
    eagerly killed people for profit. Plus with the manic effort of many neo -
    liberal cultures, companies to take away the civil right of personal
    privacy, how can we trust our governments to protect us? We cannot. They
    displayed no interest in respecting life other than for use as a commodity.
    Humanity is worth money, mass working units. Governments and the many
    idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly abused their power disappoint me
    greatly - I do not trust them at all.

    marc

    > I've been asking the same question to my self for a while, now I
  • Plasma Studii | Mon Jun 24th 2002 1 a.m.
    Happiness to Marc and Andres,

    >Your worries about bad companies, governments exploiting DNA as an
    >open source code, I believe is a very valid question.

    Open source is a hoax. It's free stuff (generally incomplete) to
    obtain for folks who can write off their IP service or it comes free
    with their job. It's not actually free for MOST people. The charge
    is just deceptively in a place that gets little attention. The code
    is useless unless you happen to have interest and time and know what
    to do with all these files and then have the software/hardware to
    re-assemble it. Most of us do not fit one or more of those
    categories.

    Linux is great. Generally, the folks who can use it, will actually
    read the gobbilty-gook and figure it out. But most folks have other
    stuff to do and no professional impetus to look at it. Somebody has
    posted (often illegally, but who cares) the source for just about
    every commercial software, including most Microsoft stuff. But
    nobody's buying the compiled code! who cares if it's "free"! they
    buy the thing that comes in a box, that they can install and work
    with less trouble.

    open source is a misnomer. it is only open to high level programmers.

    so fighting the big companies/governments who exploit it is like
    voting democrat instead of republican. lesser of two evils but still
    has no effect on the ultimate problems. In fact, one could easily
    see (and i'm sure some do) the 'crats were invented by the 'pubs, to
    provide the illusion that we are making a choice. Open source LOOKS
    like a friendly ideal but what's the real end result?

    >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    >all.

    haha. An understatement on all counts!

    >>When you buy software theres all this licence thing where they
    >>stablish that you can't do any backwards engineering, well here is
    >>where this doubt in my mind appears. When you compare this
    >>prohibition and you think of DNA as an open source code to which
    >>they want to do exactly that (backwards engineering), who protects
    >>natures copyright, who collects the royalties for nature.

    and how do we know we didn't just tear open nature's envelope and not
    notice/recognize the DNA licencing agreement? We are probably
    bumbling into illegal territory constantly, completely oblivious to
    the "no trespassing" signs. And those same people who are backwards
    engineering willy nilly will be the first to whine when we get "sued"
    by some higher court.

    judson

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    PLASMA STUDII
    http://plasmastudii.org
    223 E 10th Street
    PMB 130
    New York, NY 10003
  • MTAA | Mon Jun 24th 2002 1 a.m.
    >Happiness to Marc and Andres,
    >
    >>Your worries about bad companies, governments exploiting DNA as an
    >>open source code, I believe is a very valid question.
    >
    >Open source is a hoax. It's free stuff (generally incomplete) to
    >obtain for folks who can write off their IP service or it comes free
    >with their job. It's not actually free for MOST people. The charge
    >is just deceptively in a place that gets little attention. The
    >code is useless unless you happen to have interest and time and know
    >what to do with all these files and then have the software/hardware
    >to re-assemble it. Most of us do not fit one or more of those
    >categories.

    you are completely wrong re: open source. it's being used by millions
    of people a day. ever heard of apache? the web server which serves
    the majority of web pages on the internet? open source and FREE (as
    in beer, and also comes built into MacOSX). i'm using Mozilla quite a
    bit (free as in beer). open source browser, just released version
    1.0. works great. you can download one click installs for windoze,
    mac classic, Mac OSX, and linux. how bout openOffice.org? don't wanna
    pay 500bucks for m$office? download a one-click install of openOffice
    for FREE. opens word, excel and powerpoint files.

    no computer science degree necessary to run any of this software and
    they're all as good if not better than their commercially licensed
    counterparts.

    sure the source code is only REALLY accessible to programmers, but no
    one's stopping anyone from learning how to code. it's available to
    anyone if they want to figure it out. but almost every open source
    project, once it gets to a certain stage, has the compiled installs
    available for free to everyone.

    >
    >Linux is great. Generally, the folks who can use it, will actually
    >read the gobbilty-gook and figure it out. But most folks have other
    >stuff to do and no professional impetus to look at it. Somebody
    >has posted (often illegally, but who cares) the source for just
    >about every commercial software, including most Microsoft stuff.
    >But nobody's buying the compiled code! who cares if it's "free"!
    >they buy the thing that comes in a box, that they can install and
    >work with less trouble.
    >
    >open source is a misnomer. it is only open to high level programmers.
    >

    --
    <twhid>
    http://www.mteww.com
    </twhid>
  • marc garrett | Mon Jun 24th 2002 1 a.m.
    Hi Judson,

    I believe there are a few cross purposes concurring here, but will try to l=
    eaf out some answers in relation to your answers to me anyway.

    Like what T.Whid says apache's being used regularly, at least over here in =
    the UK and in Eastern Europe, in business and especially in D.I.Y collectiv=
    es such as the cubecinema (che/1.3.12 Server at sparror.cubecinema.com) in =
    Bristol and many other small independent Groups. And it is free, copied man=
    ically and info on 'Redhat' & 'Suse' are updated all the time.

    > Happiness to Marc and Andres,
    >
    > >Your worries about bad companies, governments exploiting DNA as an
    > >open source code, I believe is a very valid question.
    >
    > Open source is a hoax. It's free stuff (generally incomplete) to
    > obtain for folks who can write off their IP service or it comes free
    > with their job. It's not actually free for MOST people. The charge
    > is just deceptively in a place that gets little attention. The code
    > is useless unless you happen to have interest and time and know what
    > to do with all these files and then have the software/hardware to
    > re-assemble it. Most of us do not fit one or more of those
    > categories.

    I agree that some Open source networks/sites are a hoax but not all of them.

    > Linux is great. Generally, the folks who can use it, will actually
    > read the gobbilty-gook and figure it out. But most folks have other
    > stuff to do and no professional impetus to look at it. Somebody has
    > posted (often illegally, but who cares) the source for just about
    > every commercial software, including most Microsoft stuff. But
    > nobody's buying the compiled code! who cares if it's "free"! they
    > buy the thing that comes in a box, that they can install and work
    > with less trouble.

    And yes, I agree again, it does take a bit of time to figuire it all out.

    > open source is a misnomer. it is only open to high level programmers.

    > so fighting the big companies/governments who exploit it is like
    > voting democrat instead of republican. lesser of two evils but still
    > has no effect on the ultimate problems. In fact, one could easily
    > see (and i'm sure some do) the 'crats were invented by the 'pubs, to
    > provide the illusion that we are making a choice. Open source LOOKS
    > like a friendly ideal but what's the real end result?
    >
    > >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    > >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    > >all.
    >
    > haha. An understatement on all counts!

    Are you agreeing with me on that one Judson?

    > >>When you buy software theres all this licence thing where they
    > >>stablish that you can't do any backwards engineering, well here is
    > >>where this doubt in my mind appears. When you compare this
    > >>prohibition and you think of DNA as an open source code to which
    > >>they want to do exactly that (backwards engineering), who protects
    > >>natures copyright, who collects the royalties for nature.
    >
    > and how do we know we didn't just tear open nature's envelope and not
    > notice/recognize the DNA licencing agreement? We are probably
    > bumbling into illegal territory constantly, completely oblivious to
    > the "no trespassing" signs. And those same people who are backwards
    > engineering willy nilly will be the first to whine when we get "sued"
    > by some higher court.

    true...

    Marc

    > judson
    >
    >
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >
    > PLASMA STUDII
    > http://plasmastudii.org
    > 223 E 10th Street
    > PMB 130
    > New York, NY 10003
    > + bostoniscoolerthannewyorkbostoniscoolerthannewyorkbostoniscoolerthanne
    > -> Rhizome.org
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php3
    >
  • Karl Petersen | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    hello judson,
    i had asked about free software; looks like you _did_ try linux, maybe
    four years ago when it was even more confused kernelwise and driverwise
    than it may be. try again & find someone to help install, share configs.
    use your shell account, burn in on that.

    > with their job. It's not actually free for MOST people. The charge

    "actually" ? the us presidents want us "actually committed."
    JavaTM is open source and not free software; is that why your website,
    is a big blank black spot when i try to view it ?

    > is useless unless you happen to have interest and time and know what
    > to do with all these files and then have the software/hardware to

    FreeBSD is actually free, if you have bandwidth burn a cd-r + install it,
    it is complete. no re-assembly required, but you need a computer with
    a hard drive and a x86 chipset .. is that difficult for many people ?

    > read the gobbilty-gook and figure it out. But most folks have other
    > stuff to do and no professional impetus to look at it. Somebody has

    most folks are aliterate morons who cannot understand a thought that
    requires more than one sentence. so what ? so, operating a command line,
    and a basic knowledge of UNIX are required to play. you can be "computer
    literate," or you can be interface-literate.

    > nobody's buying the compiled code! who cares if it's "free"! they
    > buy the thing that comes in a box, that they can install and work

    i care if it's nasty and broken and subject to unpredictable behavior.
    and you are right, software is an entirely technical and not aesthetic
    realm - but software that works, directly and simply, destroys the
    decadent beauty of software that pretends, or has committed to complexity.

    > open source is a misnomer. it is only open to high level programmers.

    that's right, entirely _technical. that is what computers are for,
    not arts and entertainment. good free software needs few correct commands.
    eg. the postfix mail server ( open source from ibm, ) - three commands
    to compile and install. this is the configuration:
    myhostname = diocletian.dsl.visi.com
    mydomain = visi.com
    masquerade_domains = visi.com
    masquerade_exceptions = root,mailer-daemon
    then start the server and add that command to the startup script.
    you will think i am bragging, but this is indeed "high level,"
    someone could demonstrate this and say to you "it just works."
    what was your objection ?

    > so fighting the big companies/governments who exploit it is like
    > voting democrat instead of republican. lesser of two evils but still
    > has no effect on the ultimate problems. In fact, one could easily

    no, this was yesterday. PC vs MAC ? PC won, last i heard.
    commodity software can be free. some is, and some is not. more could be.

    > see (and i'm sure some do) the 'crats were invented by the 'pubs, to
    > provide the illusion that we are making a choice. Open source LOOKS

    there was a civil war involved. perhaps they dont watch television.

    > like a friendly ideal but what's the real end result?

    this is a very very noble principle.
    what is the real end result of macromedia flash ?
    un-readable and un-selectable text, ugly JPEGs, impoverished GUI.
    name your favorite app.

    > >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    > >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    > >all.
    >
    > haha. An understatement on all counts!
    >
    >
    > >>When you buy software theres all this licence thing where they
    > >>stablish that you can't do any backwards engineering, well here is
    > >>where this doubt in my mind appears. When you compare this
    > >>prohibition and you think of DNA as an open source code to which
    > >>they want to do exactly that (backwards engineering), who protects
    > >>natures copyright, who collects the royalties for nature.
    >
    > and how do we know we didn't just tear open nature's envelope and not
    > notice/recognize the DNA licencing agreement? We are probably
    > bumbling into illegal territory constantly, completely oblivious to
    > the "no trespassing" signs. And those same people who are backwards
    > engineering willy nilly will be the first to whine when we get "sued"
    > by some higher court.

    i think you know what matters.

    > judson
    >

    yours,
    Karl
  • Plasma Studii | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    > > >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    > > >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    > > >all.
    > >
    > > haha. An understatement on all counts!
    >
    >Are you agreeing with me on that one Judson?

    yup. Agreeing with your thesis but also agreeing enthusiastically
    with your self-evaluation.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    PLASMA STUDII
    http://plasmastudii.org
    223 E 10th Street
    PMB 130
    New York, NY 10003
  • marc garrett | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    Come here and say that and i'll buy you a beer :-)

    marc

    > >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    > >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    > >all.
    >
    > haha. An understatement on all counts!

    Are you agreeing with me on that one Judson?

    yup. Agreeing with your thesis but also agreeing enthusiastically with yo=
    ur self-evaluation.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    PLASMA STUDII
    http://plasmastudii.org
    223 E 10th Street
    PMB 130
    New York, NY 10003
  • Plasma Studii | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    >JavaTM is open source and not free software; is that why your website,
    >is a big blank black spot when i try to view it ?

    sorry. that site isn't for all computers. if you were able to click
    once and get past the green page to the black one (with Java on it)
    but just got black, sounds like it's working but your processor isn't
    updating your screen fast enough to give any visible result.

    If you want, here's a test.
    http://plasmastudii.org/counter/counter.html
    several simple client-side animations, to see how your browser
    handles graphic updates and passing info from the browser to the CPU
    to the screen.

    judson

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    PLASMA STUDII
    http://plasmastudii.org
    223 E 10th Street
    PMB 130
    New York, NY 10003
  • Andres Yepes | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    >
    > > >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    > > >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    > > >all.
    > >
    > > haha. An understatement on all counts!
    >
    > Are you agreeing with me on that one Judson?
    >

    > yup. Agreeing with your thesis but also agreeing enthusiastically with your self-evaluation.
    >

    Thanks for joining the discusion, but just to harness the forces unleashed by the original question I posted

    Yes, we are talking in substancece about the ruling paradigm but lest not forget the parallel I was stablishing between the rules for software and the ones that are being stablished for DNA engineering.

    I think theres in interesting and important discussion on that level, from the artisitic, legal, ethic, economical stand points.

    I live in Colombia and both sides of the parallel are important here, as an artist and as a grass roots activist in the electronic arena I have a question about the access to these technologies in countries such as mine.

    As a person who is in touch with the knowledge of the ancient aboriginal wise men, who have been exploited for their knowledge by the great farmaceutical companies and whose DNA has been harvested with no clear ends by the so called genome project.

    What do we as a comunity have to say about it, or do we just let the forces that be flow even if it means endangering my liberties.

    Andres

    __________________________________________________________________
    Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

    Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
  • marc garrett | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    Hi there Andres,

    What do we as a comunity have to say about it, or do we just let the forces=
    that be flow even if it means endangering my liberties.

    Are you asking yourself and us, as a net community or in relation to your o=
    wn physical community and locality?

    In respect of your own community I believe that there are various ways of d=
    eclaring the critical issues when resources are being stolen by corporate c=
    ompanies. Forming links with other groups who feel similar is a start, thus=
    furthering the information of the exploitation that is currently and has h=
    istorically been happening to your own culture. Also, if you so happen to b=
    e an artist, then start mobalizing your projects around your questions, thu=
    s placing those important questions in your work so others are aware of the=
    problems. Also form new D.I.Y networks, radio stations that link with comm=
    unities outside, onto the Internet etc, reclaim the land the property and =
    give it back to its rightful owners, the people in the community. Sounds ea=
    sy I'm sure, and in real life a very different story. The zapatistas http:/=
    /www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/zapsincyber.html
    have been doing that exact thing and getting people all over the world inte=
    rested in their actions in forging ways in reclaiming their own lands again=
    . Forging links and asking advice from such organizations wil no doubt help=
    in some way, but as we all know positive change is always slow and negativ=
    e change happens too quickly.

    (The international circulation through the Net of the struggles of the Zapa=
    tistas in Chiapas, Mexico has become one of the most successful examples of=
    the use of computer communications by grassroots social movements. That ci=
    rculation has not only brought support to the Zapatistas from throughout Me=
    xico and the rest of the World, but it has sparked a world wide discussion =
    of the meaning and implications of the Zapatista rebellion for many other c=
    onfrontations with contemporary capitalist economic and political policies.=

    The indigenous character of the Zapatista rebellion has also provoked new a=
    wareness, respect and study of the much broader phenomenon of indigenous re=
    vival and struggle in this period.)

    marc

    >
    > >
    > > > >Governments and the many idiotic (mostly) males that have cruelly
    > > > >abused their power disappoint me greatly - I do not trust them at
    > > > >all.
    > > >
    > > > haha. An understatement on all counts!
    > >
    > > Are you agreeing with me on that one Judson?
    > >
    >
    > > yup. Agreeing with your thesis but also agreeing enthusiastically with=
    your self-evaluation.
    > >
    >
    > Thanks for joining the discusion, but just to harness the forces unleashe=
    d by the original question I posted
    >
    > Yes, we are talking in substancece about the ruling paradigm but lest not=
    forget the parallel I was stablishing between the rules for software and t=
    he ones that are being stablished for DNA engineering.
    >
    > I think theres in interesting and important discussion on that level, fro=
    m the artisitic, legal, ethic, economical stand points.
    >
    > I live in Colombia and both sides of the parallel are important here, as =
    an artist and as a grass roots activist in the electronic arena I have a qu=
    estion about the access to these technologies in countries such as mine.
    >
    > As a person who is in touch with the knowledge of the ancient aboriginal =
    wise men, who have been exploited for their knowledge by the great farmaceu=
    tical companies and whose DNA has been harvested with no clear ends by the =
    so called genome project.
    >
    > What do we as a comunity have to say about it, or do we just let the forc=
    es that be flow even if it means endangering my liberties.
    >
    > Andres
    >
    >
    > __________________________________________________________________
    > Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experi=
    ence the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.ne=
    tscape.com/
    >
    > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail=
    .netscape.com/
    >
    >
    >
  • marc garrett | Tue Jun 25th 2002 1 a.m.
    hi there,

    do you have any examples that the list can see in reference to your own work
    and activities?

    marc

    > thanks marc
    > >
    > >What do we as a comunity have to say about it, or do we just let the
    forces that be flow even if it means endangering my liberties.
    > >
    > >Are you asking yourself and us, as a net community or in relation to your
    own physical community and locality?
    > >
    > yes the question is for us all, I do not think we can call ourselfs
    civilized, globalthinkers or translocal or what ever adjective we find to
    convey that we sense the globe, earth as one big space ship in which we all
    travel as long as we keep thinking of it as little segments.
    >
    > In respect to my own comunity, I'm a mestizo inside with the looks of a
    mediterranean european, but I seek in the fountains of knowledge of
    aboriginal wisdom.
    >
    > I can tell you that a few years a go a Entrepeneur from USA tried to
    patent the ayahuasca vine which is part of the science inherited by the
    aborignal people of the Amazonic bassin, and they fought back, but this is
    just one case.
    >
    > I think artist should arise concience on the general public and I like to
    think that my work walks in that path.
    >
    > And that is ultimately the reason why I posted the question in this
    particular rhizome
    >
    > Andres
    >
    >
    >
    > __________________________________________________________________
    > Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas.
    Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape!
    http://shopnow.netscape.com/
    >
    > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at
    http://webmail.netscape.com/
    >
    >
    >
Your Reply