firehose

urhajos:

Heaven & Hell Night Club in Paris, 1890s.

Today's item from the NSA's Tailored Access Operations (TAO) group implant catalog:

FIREWALK

(TS//SI//REL) FIREWALK is a bidirectional network implant, capable of passively collecting Gigabit Ethernet network traffic, and actively injecting Ethernet packets onto the same target network.

(TS//SI//REL) FIREWALK is a bi-directional 10/100/1000bT (Gigabit) Ethernet network implant residing within a dual stacked RJ45 / USB connector FIREWALK is capable of filtering and egressing network traffic over a custom RF link and injecting traffic as commanded; this allows a ethernet tunnel (VPN) to be created between target network and the ROC (or an intermediate redirector node such as DNT's DANDERSPRITZ tool.) FIREWALK allows active exploitation of a target network with a firewall or air gap protection.

(TS//SI//REL) FIREWALK uses the HOWLERMONKEY transceiver for back-end communications. It can communicate with an LP or other compatible HOWLERMONKEY based ANT products to increase RF range through multiple hops.

Status: Prototype Available -- August 2008

Unit Cost: 50 Units $537K

Page, with graphics, is here. General information about TAO and the catalog is here.

In the comments, feel free to discuss how the exploit works, how we might detect it, how it has probably been improved since the catalog entry in 2008, and so on.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The rumor mill says that iOS7.1 fixes the daily crasing on iOS7. That's good news because the big change with iOS7 was the perception of Apple's threshold for quality. A common refrain from "regular people" I know has been that Apple's software is pretty poor quality.¹ Many of them have the opinion that iOS7 is more unstable and confusing than Windows. Even I consider iOS7 to be a great source of jokes about software crashing. That's going to be a hard train to turn around.

I really believe that Apple has harmed their brand with iOS7. It's more devastating than any Samsung ad campaign. They have set back their reputation by releasing a highly unstable operating system for their most commonly used device. They rushed out new designs that viscerally disturb users. I've never seen someone more relieved by a single tweak than when I've demonstrated the reduced motion option.

This week we get a patch for iOS that might fix the daily crashes and sporadic power and bandwidth surges. I guess that's good, but cleaning up the mess is not the same thing as not making a mess.

iOS7 should be an enormous embarrassment for Apple management. They set a timeline that pushed iOS7 out half-baked and I hope they regret that decision. I regret ever endorsing iOS to anyone that was tricked or coerced into "upgrading" to iOS7. It's been a disaster in confidence all around.

I recently wrote an article for Quartz in which I challenged the idea of gender wage discrimination in some fields in the tech industry.  A few minutes after the article posted on the website, the World Economic Forum sent the tweet:

There is no #gendergap in tech salaries says @NinjaEconomics wef.ch/b3Jy8 #wef—
World Economic Forum (@davos) March 03, 2014

But, that’s not actually what I was arguing. Headlines and tweets have the problem of fitting a lot of information into a small amount of space, so nuance is often lost. The central thesis of my article was that new research shows no significant difference in earnings one year after graduation between male and female engineers, who have the same credentials and make the same choices regarding their career. How’s that for a more precise headline?

On Twitter, many readers have questioned the data collection and research methodology. Others wondered how accurately I was portraying the issue of the gender gap. The following are the comments that came up most often in tweets, reader annotations and personal emails, and the responses from Claudia Goldin, a professor of Economics at Harvard University and Catherine Hill, director of research at American Association of University Women, who was co-author of the study, and myself:

@RealLisaC @nilofer @NinjaEconomics "confounding factors" quite interesting terminology.. + "sample" is frankly BS… #skeweddata—
Lauren Cooney (@lcooney) March 03, 2014

Since Quartz is a publication for a general audience, it’s possible some terms were misunderstood when not clearly defined. Confounding typically means “confusing” or “surprising,” but in statistics, it also refers to hidden variables that can lead researchers to think a relationship between two variables exist when they don’t. A popular example is, “Ice cream sales increase swimming deaths.” The two things are positively correlated but there is a more likely explanation than their relationship. In this case, the “season” is the confounding variable since summertime influences both ice cream sales and swimming pool deaths.

In AAUW’s study, the sample was restricted to those under 35 years old, who were earning their first bachelor’s degree. If someone is over 35, he or she is more likely to have more work experience, which would lead to higher wages when compared to a recent graduate with little or no work experience. Also, if someone has two bachelor’s degrees, he or she is also likely to earn more money than someone of the same age, but who holds one degree.  Therefore, removing these two confounding factors makes it easier to study the effects of gender.

@Spacekatgal @NinjaEconomics @lcooney "hidden variables" are exactly what drive the real wage gap.—
Lisa Caywood (@RealLisaC) March 03, 2014

Most labor economists agree that the majority of the gender wage gap is explained through choices like education, occupation, or hours worked. Goldin, former president of the American Economic Association, is widely considered one of the top scholars in her field and believes that “the gender gap in wages is a summary statistic for gender differences in work.”

“Women without children have earnings almost equal to those of comparable men,” Goldin told me. “As women have increased their productivity-enhancing characteristics and as they ‘look’ more like men, the human capital part of the wage difference has been squeezed out.”

@NinjaEconomics It's misleading to look for gender pay gap only in 1st year of work: inequalities emerge over time bit.ly/1eWm0jc—
Niamh O Riordan (@niamhmoriordan) March 04, 2014

I don’t make the claim that wages in the first year are representative of lifetime wages. Though Goldin’s research also shows that in some science and technology fields for those under 45, women earn more than men (pdf) when controlled for education and work hours.

It’s true that the gender gap widens as women get older, but more research needs to be done to understand why the pay gap increases more in some occupations than in others. One explanation is the relationship between work hours and earnings, since some mothers reduce the number of hours they work or choose a more flexible schedule—two decisions that affect career path and lifetime earnings.

“The gender gap in pay would be considerably reduced and might even vanish if firms did not have an incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who worked long hours and who worked particular hours,” says Goldin.  “Such change has taken off in various sectors, [including] technology.”

@guan @mims ACS 3-year estimate of median earnings for f/t workers: not so much equal pay. cc @NinjaEconomics http://t.co/C9Be098xSQ—
Shane Ferro (@shaneferro) March 03, 2014

First, median earnings don’t control for factors such as education or occupation, which are controlled for in the AAUW study. Second, women’s earnings rapidly decline to .70 (over her lifetime) and the study I am referencing looks at graduates one year out of college. Comparing raw earnings versus adjusted earnings isn’t analogous and neither is comparing lifetime earnings and young cohort earnings.

Constructing birth cohorts using data from the US Census and ACS, Goldin observes the following (pdf, table 1b): “Men and women begin their employment with earnings that are fairly similar, both for full-time year-round workers and for all workers with controls for hours and weeks. College graduate men and women working full-time, full-year earn in the 90% range when controlled for hours, weeks and education.”

@ninjaeconomics @halsrethink I don't think you've found any positive changes. Coming to the opposite conclusion of the study should have…—
Brianna Wu (@Spacekatgal) March 04, 2014

Highlighting pay equality in STEM fields might lead to more young women entering those occupations, a change many people would support. When I asked if Professor Goldin feels there is public perception of wage discrimination, she agreed that “Now, it’s a lot less.” Pay equality may also encourage women to stay in the labor force longer since their participation in the labor market will be stymied if they feel disadvantaged, according to Goldin.

@cmtrapolino @shaneferro @mims At first glance study seems suspect. What engineers make $55,142 here? Starting salaries much higher—
Vivek Wadhwa (@wadhwa) March 03, 2014

“Regarding our estimate of earnings for engineering majors one year out of college, it is similar to findings by other scholars [pdf],” said Dr. Hill. “The commenter seems to be misunderstanding the difference between the whole engineering workforce and those working one year after college graduation.  Of course, we would expect salaries to rise over time.”

@Spacekatgal @GlennF The article seems to come to the opposite conclusion from the original researchers. “Tech” not a sector in the study.—
David Starke (@dstarke) March 04, 2014

The authors agree with my concluding statement that the two highest paying jobs, according to their study, are computer science professional and engineer. “We don’t have the breakdown on the relative importance of math, computer science and physical sciences,” Hill said.  “In general, computer science and engineering account for the majority of STEM jobs.”

According to a statement from Dice.com, career website that serves information technology and engineering professionals: “With tech workers, the compensation gender gap has disappeared. Average salaries are equal for male and female tech pros, provided we’re comparing equal levels of experience and education and parallel job titles.”

@shaneferro @mims you can’t. they think they’re being clever by restricting to recent graduates, but it’s lazy.—
  (@guan) March 03, 2014

“It is not lazy,” Hill told me, “It’s simply what we can accomplish with the data set we used. Our study is limited to one particular time because we’re trying to get an apples-to-apples comparison. We have a panel of experts that reviews our reports; this information is on our site.”

The gender pay gap is a focal point of AAUW’s research and advocacy work. Taking a closer look at the data, the study finds that women’s choices—college major, occupation, hours at work—do account for part of the pay gap. It’s beneficial to do a study that only captures a portion of a woman’s career because it can help us have a more detailed understanding of the changing factors that affect the gender wage gap. By studying cohorts (age bands), Goldin’s research shows that women and men start their careers very close in earnings, then the gap widens for the first few decades but then narrows as men and women become older.

@mitrakalita @mims It was the way new piece was framed and the inaccuracies and questionable data that were at issue. misrepresented study—
Vivek Wadhwa (@wadhwa) March 04, 2014

I asked Hill if my premise and conclusion were supported by their evidence.  She replied that my statements were consistent with their findings, that “one year after college, among those students who go on to work full time in the year after graduation, we found no statistical difference in the earnings of men and women who took jobs in engineering and math, computer sciences or physical sciences.”

“We used the Baccalaureate and Beyond data that is a federal survey for which information is available on the NCES website,” said Hill. “For most of our calculations, we used the online tool that is on the website and students (or anyone) can easily reproduce the numbers. For the regression analysis, we used internal data using a consulting firm called MRI.  MRI is a well respected firm and a leader in educational analysis. The report was based on an earlier analysis that I did with Judy Dey, an economist who now works for the BLS.  It is called Beyond the Pay Gap.  We did a similar analysis although it is not identical.”

Some have said my approach is excessively optimistic. In my article, I do state that this study shows there is a gender pay gap by college major, in most occupations, and overall.  However, I decided to focus on the positive aspect, that there are some professions with no statistical difference in earnings between men and women in the beginning of their career.

@wadhwa @shaneferro Linkbait headline + questionable data + its conclusions are bad for women. Disappointing, @NinjaEconomics.—
Christina Trapolino (@cmtrapolino) March 03, 2014

My conclusion was this:  The tech industry is unique in its history of being “equal pay for equal work”: A longitudinal study of female engineers in the 1980s, by Laurie Morgan at the University of Michigan, showed a wage penalty of “essentially zero” for younger cohorts. Today, the two highest paying professions with wage equality are in technology (computer scientist and engineer).

I support pay equality as well as a healthy discussion surrounding it. It’s important not to overlook the challenges women have faced in the fight for equal pay while we celebrating the more recent successes.

I asked Goldin if we shouldn’t discuss a narrowing pay gap because it hurts women by minimizing the issues they face. She replied, “Facts are facts. Truth doesn’t hurt.”
Follow Cynthia on Twitter @NinjaEconomics. We welcome your comments at ideas@qz.com. 

A couple of years ago it was announced that there would be a new Cosmos series, patterned after the 1980 series by Carl Sagan, this time featuring Neil deGrasse Tyson. I’m on record as being a huge fan of the original series — I would say that it’s one of the most influential TV series in my own personal history — and the new series was going to have Ann Druyan, Sagan’s wife, as a producer, so I was reasonably certain that the new version would stick to the basic concept of the original, gussied up with current effects and such. So I was looking forward it when it showed up.

The first episode aired last night on Fox (which is significant in itself — an unabashedly pro-science documentary show on commercial network TV? Even the original series could only manage PBS), and I have to say I was pretty content with what I saw. As someone who has written an astronomy book and is well steeped in science, I’m not the target audience for the show — there’s nothing that Neil deGrasse Tyson is going to say in the series that I’m not already very likely to know — but as I said last night, if I were ten years old, the age I was when the original series came out, my mind would be blown. The show is colorful and beautiful to look at, nicely-paced and edited and Tyson is a pleasant host. He’s not Sagan, but then why should he be? Being himself is sufficient.

But the main reason why the show works this time is the same reason why the show worked the first time — it’s unabashedly aimed at a popular audience. I’ve said before that one of the things I learned from the original series is that so much of science is understandable to the average person; I thumbnail it as “anyone can get 80% of any scientific topic.” That other 20% is what takes real attention — but if you can get most people 80% of the way there, just by speaking plain language and being engaging while you do so, the benefits can be enormous in the long run. This series is made to provide that 80%. 

This Cosmos series, like the one before it, doesn’t shy away from firmly establishing scientific principles and theory as factual and necessary; it’s even confident enough to point out the things we don’t know because the suggestion is that by adhering to the simple scientific principles of questioning, testing and observing, we might eventually learn more about them. I think presenting these things as desirable in themselves and not in conflict with any other sort of thinking is pretty smart.

Quibbles? I have a few. The tour of the solar system in the first episode featured an overly populated asteroid belt; the music by Alan Silvestri is decent but so far not on the same level as the iconic music of the original series, provided by Vangelis; I thought the animated bit about Giordano Bruno went on a bit long. I also note that these are thing the nearly-45-year-old John Scalzi would notice; I don’t know that the 10-year-old me would notice them, or care if he did.

Overall, I’m happy with the new series so far, and positively delighted that Fox is giving it the sort of play that it is — launching it on nine other of its networks aside from its flagship commercial network is not insignificant. Will it have the same impact that the original series had? I don’t know, although it would be nice. But even if it doesn’t, I don’t have any doubt that there are kids out there who will take to it like I took to the original. And what a gift that would be, to set into motion a new generation of scientists, writers and thinkers, lighting candles against the darkness of a demon-haunted world.

I’ve felt sorry for Amtrak for a long time. Economic pressures and the unique problems of any rail system based inside the US (where automobile travel has too long been the be-all and end-all) have turned it into a faint shadow of the formerly great passenger and freight rail lines that helped define the 19th and early 20th-century history of the US.

But I’m finished feeling sorry for it as of now. It’s no crime to have fallen on hard times. But offering people what seems to be something wonderful and then ripping them off the minute they start trying to take advantage of it? NOT GOOD.

On the face of it, it sounds like a lovely offer.

#AmtrakResidency was designed to allow creative professionals who are passionate about train travel and writing to work on their craft in an inspiring environment. Round-trip train travel will be provided on an Amtrak long-distance route. Each resident will be given a private sleeper car, equipped with a desk, a bed and a window to watch the American countryside roll by for inspiration. Routes will be determined based on availability.

Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis and reviewed by a panel. Up to 24 writers will be selected for the program starting March 17, 2014 through March 31, 2015.  A passion for writing and an aspiration to travel with Amtrak for inspiration are the sole criteria for selection. Both emerging and established writers will be considered.

But then you read the terms and conditions, and the alarm bells go off big time. Go read them: I’ll wait. I’m not going to reproduce them here: they give me the pip.

Clause 5 is where the trouble starts. Clause 5 essentially says: “When you turn in your application, gee, anything can happen to your original writing. Who knows? We have a billion PR people working for us whose work yours might be [airquotes] confused with [/airquotes]. By signing this you agree that should this happen, you have no recourse, and we never have to credit you or pay you one thin dime. [But you’re so desperate, you won’t care, will you?] #lol #loser”

Clause 5 by itself ought to be enough to make you walk away, it’s so slimy. But then comes clause 6, in which you assign to Amtrak the irrevocable world rights to all the data in your application including your writing, forever and a day. And the day after that. 

I learned the lesson long ago both from other freelance writers and at my agent’s knee, and the lesson is as important now as it ever was — in this day of the effortless digital ripoff, perhaps way more so. The lesson is this: Never give anyone world rights to any of your writing.  Ever. Ever. Because who knows if that one piece of writing is the one that would have made you famous worldwide and rich beyond the dreams of avarice? I wouldn’t sell anyone world rights to a story for a million dollars and that necklace of flawless cabochon emeralds I saw in the window at Harry Winston that one time*. But give away world rights to something for a single lousy train ticket? I don’t think so. They could plate the inside of that sleeper with platinum and lay on catering from Dallmayr and I still wouldn’t do it if it meant they got to keep world rights.

Better pay the ticket price yourself and keep the rights to your work in your own pocket than swap those rights for the chance at a single train ride, sleeper or not. (And something else to note here. There is no declaration of who owns the rights to the material you produce on this train trip. There is no way to tell what paperwork you’re going to be required to sign if you actually win. Oh, and did I mention the background checks they want to conduct on you first, to make sure you’re not some kind of crypto-crook who’s going to embarrass them? Clause 9.)

…Now, I hear they’re fixing clause 6 in some way or other (doubtless already having heard the first wave of complaints). That’s all well and good. But I haven’t heard a word about clause 5, which stinks to just as high a heaven.  And they tried to get away with clause 6 as it was. That says way too much about their concept of good faith as it applies to writing, and writers.

It’s not worth it. This thing is poison. So please, I beg of you, step away from the very large diesel-powered vehicle. I too am passionate about train travel and writing… way more than most people might guess on the first count. But this is not the way to go about it. If they’re willing to try to take this much off you before you even win, what happens when you actually get on board?

*I leaned my forehead against the window right there on Fifth Avenue in the twilight and moaned like a broken thing. Ah God those emeralds. They didn’t have a single inclusion, not one of them. (sigh) …Never mind.

Writing on the train on one’s own nickel: the Belfast-Dublin Enterprise, 2004

(CC train image at the top from Jack Snell on Flickr)

“That’s the Power of Hair” is an interactive website for Old Spice hair products from creative agency Wieden+Kennedy that suggests the stuff is so fantastic that hair styled with it can play songs by American pop rock band Huey Lewis and the News. The website allows users to input the name of a Huey Lewis and the News song, like their hits “The Power of Love” or “Hip to Be Square”, and it’ll play a short clip of hair playing a rendition of the song.

Quinns: Good morning, my mewling clutch of board-kittens! You look adorable! Alas, I know your secret. If you don't get your weekly games news, you'll become a snapping, thrashing pit of board-gators, keen to rend my body like so much gory blu-tac.

I'm quite attached to my body (specifically, by my skeleton) so let's get you your news. It's the 100th anniversary of the Panama Canal, and Stronghold Games has announced PANAMAX, a board game of managing shipping companies located in the Free Zone of Colon. An area I thought was to be found nnnnnnno apparently I have too much moral fortitude to make that particular joke about Paul's mum.

Read More

	Courtney shared this story from The ToastThe Toast:
	BEST ONE SO FAR

DIRTBAG SHAKESPEARE imagines modern remakes of Shakespearean plays with a teenage dirtbag cast. The rest is pretty self-explanatory. Previously: Dirtbag Hamlet.

(TYBALT is using BENVOLIO’S own hands to smack him in the face)
TYBALT: stop hitting yourself
stop hitting yourself
(BENVOLIO manages to retract all but his middle fingers)
TYBALT: hey
fuck you man
that’s not cool

ROMEO throws himself facedown on BENVOLIO’S bed
BENVOLIO: what’s the matter
ROMEO: you wouldn’t understand
BENVOLIO: then get off my bed
ROMEO (muffled): no

ROMEO: I WILL NEVER LOVE AGAIN
BENVOLIO: do you want to go out
would that make you feel better
ROMEO: NO
god
you never understand anything
BENVOLIO: ok sorry
ROMEO: wait
lets go out though

LADY CAPULET: juliet the party already started
get dressed and come downstairs
JULIET (smoking): youre a fascist
i dont go downstairs with fascists
LADY CAPULET: would it kill you to put on something nice
and be polite for five minutes
JULIET (smoking two cigarettes): yes

MERCUTIO: what if fairies
had midwives
ROMEO: lol what
MERCUTIO: what if she taught people how to have sex
ROMEO: what

ROMEO: hi
JULIET: hi
i dont even want to be here
i fucking hate my parents
ROMEO: that’s cool
JULIET: do you want to get out of here
(ROMEO climbs behind Juliet on her Vespa)
ROMEO [OS]: sick

JULIET: we should get married
ROMEO: okay
JULIET: thatll show em
ROMEO: when
JULIET: i dont give a shit
like right now
ROMEO: hell yeah

 (in bed)
ROMEO: I wish I were a bird
JULIET: do you want to have sex again
ROMEO: yes
ROMEO: wait how old are you even
JULIET: how old are you
ROMEO: fair enough

LADY CAPULET: so what do you think of Paris
He really seems to like you
JULIET: WHY DON’T YOU JUST FUCKING MURDER ME ALREADY
YOU FASCIST

JULIET: help me sneak out tonight
im gettin married
then im gettin laid
NURSE (stubs out cigarette): fuckin HELL YEAH

(ROMEO and JULIET stand outside a church)
ROMEO: I want to get married
FRIAR LAURENCE: Who is this
ROMEO: who is who
FRIAR LAURENCE: where is rosaline
ROMEO: who the fuck is rosaline

(MERCUTIO is dying)
MERCUTIO: fuck
this is so fucking gay dude
ROMEO: fuck this
MERCUTIO: this is so fucking gay
(He dies)

NURSE: why don’t you just marry Paris too
JULIET: what
NURSE: two for the price of one
you could nail em both
double patty on a single bun
JULIET: what

JULIET: wheres tybalt
ROMEO: who
JULIET: my cousin tybalt
ROMEO (hides bloody sword): who fuckin cares
he was a fascist anyway
let’s run away
JULIET: okay
where
ROMEO: wherever you want

JULIET: do you know what I think would be super romantic
ROMEO: what
JULIET: if we drank poison together
ROMEO: yeah
okay yeah
JULIET: hell yeah
you go first babe

Artwork by Rob VonRamm.

Read more Dirtbag Romeo and Juliet at The Toast.

Have you been wanting to dive into the world of Star Trek novels, but aren't sure where to start? Check out the Almighty Star Trek Lit-verse Reading Order Flowchart, which lays out which books should come earliest on your reading list.

Read more...

What’s your damage?

The 100 Most Beautiful Words in English

Guess what? This is what it sounds like when a large and angry housecat swats at a baby and then chases the baby's parents into a condominium bedroom—prompting those frightened and nervous parents to make a sheepish call to 911 for relief.

Now you know. (Thanks, KGW!)

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]