Books
Creative Works, Greed and Free Information, Pt. 3
Jun 9th
This series of posts was started to address a common justification for the piracy of digital products, the idea that information should be free. In the first post, I examined a related argument, that corporations are evil, and argued that it is no excuse for piracy. In part two, I started to look at the information should be free argument by trying to define information. I asserted that there are two definitions of information relevant to the discussion and argued that the first, knowledge, cannot be applied to digital products. I concluded with the following:
…since music, movies, or software all fail to fit the definition of knowledge, this falls flat as an excuse to pirate digital goods. Where the ambiguity arises, and where you can get your ammunition to call me a moron, is when information means data.
Are you ready to call me a moron? OK. Here’s your ammunition. The word data has different meanings in different contexts. It could be the results of scientific experimentation or observation, the results of a public poll, a set of statistics such as those collected during a Census, and more. The meaning of data relevant to our discussion is given to us by Merriam-Webster as:
3 : information in numerical form that can be digitally transmitted or processed
So there you go. Digital products such as books, movies, music and software all fit that definition nicely. Now you can sit back, call me a moron, and laugh about how you’re entitled to all of that music you’ve been downloading because it is information and information should be free! Finished? Good. Now I’m going to show why you’re a bigger moron than I am.
Before we go further, it would be helpful to understand a bit about information in numerical form that can be digitally transmitted or processed. Technically, computer data is not stored or processed in a numerical format. But it is often visualized that way, so the definition works for our purposes. Computer data is often viewed in base 16, or hexadecimal, format by software developers and crackers because it’s not too hard for a human to interpret. But on the computer architectures we use today, it is stored, transmitted, and processed in a binary format. If you were to directly translate computer data to an equivalent numeric format, you would use base 2, which is a series of zeros and ones (11110110, for example). Not so easy for we humans to interpret.
If you were to print out any file from your computer in binary form, regardless of the format of the file itself, you would see an unbroken sequence of ones and zeros. It would all appear meaningless. And you know what? It would be. Those ones and zeros only have meaning to the computer. If your printout is of an image file, you have absolutely no way of reproducing that image yourself without feeding it manually (using special software) to another computer. If it is a music file, you have no way of reproducing or transcribing it. And you certainly wouldn’t be able to do anything with the binary printout of a program. Even if you have the patience to learn to interpret binary printouts, they would still be out of context and, therefore, meaningless to you.
Here’s the problem. A given sequence of binary numbers can have several different meanings, depending on its context. As an example, look at this sequence: 11110110. By itself, meaningless. But in an executable file (a program) on an Intel processor (or any processor with that supports the x86 architecture) it might be a command to execute one of several types of multiply operations on a couple of numbers. Or, instead of a CPU instruction, it might represent the number 247. Or it might represent the division sign, ÷. Or it might be part of a longer sequence, something like 1111011001101110, which could again have a different meaning on different CPU architectures. Furthermore, these numbers could represent operating system commands. Or they could represent other commands inside a program.
The point is, computer data out of context is meaningless. It needs to be interepreted by the CPU, the operating system and, ultimately, the software you run on your system. Take a Windows executable file and try to run it natively on Linux or Mac OSX. Not going to happen. By themselves, those operating systems do not know how to interpret the binary data in Windows executable format. Try to run a program written for an Intel CPU on a PowerPC CPU. Won’t happen. Each CPU architecture and operating system has its own way of interpreting binary data. This is a very important factor in deciding whether or not movies, music and software are information.
To illustrate, let’s take something from the real world. Preferably, something that qualifies as knowledge. A phone number would do just fine. It qualifies as the knowing-what type of knowledge. If someone were to ask you for your phone number, you might write it down on a piece of paper. Or, you might send it via email. Whether it’s on paper, or in binary format on an email server, the number itself is still the same. All that has changed is the medium on which it was delivered.
Now, would you consider a piece of paper to be information? If you would, you’re a lost cause and can just stop reading now. The paper is not information. But the phone number is, in the form of knowledge. As for the email, that’s a different story. Not only is the phone number a kind of information, but so is the binary code used to represent it. Now we’re dealing with two types of information — knowledge, the phone number, and data, the binary code. One type for human consumption and the other for computer consumption. When the recipient reads your email, he’ll be able to see your phone number in text format on his monitor. But there’s more to the story.
I’ve decided to write a new program for fun (not really, but indulge me). My program will go through emails, extract phone numbers, and save them to disk as JPEG image files. What does that mean? It means that software which knows how to interpret the JPEG image file format will be able to read the file and interpret the binary data that represents your phone number not as text, but as the color values of a digital image. The binary data is the same, but it no longer represents your phone number. Did your phone number change? Even if I directly edited the binary data that represents your phone number such that it became a different phone number, your real phone number would still be the same. If not, the universe as I know it no longer exists and we can all go home now.
If you haven’t figured it out, I’ll summarize the point I’m trying to make. The binary data that represents your phone number in an email is distinct from your phone number itself. The two are not inextricably tied together. Changing one does not change the other. They are separate entities. It goes back to that word that I emphasized in the last post, representation. I’ll explain.
Take a board game. Any board game. Remember, we determined in part two that board games do not classify as information. The rules do, but the representation of the rules, in the form of the game board and accessories, does not. Now let’s make a computer version of the board game for Windows. The rules are the same (assuming we didn’t intentionally modify them), but this version does not have a physical representation. Instead, it has a graphical representation on a computer monitor. Furthermore, the graphical representation is enabled by an executable computer file, which is a collection of binary data that can be interpreted on a Windows operating system. Now let’s port the game to Mac OSX. If we were to compare the binary data of the Mac version with that of the Windows version, we’ll find that while a lot of it is the same, there are several differences. However, the graphical representation will essentially be the same. And, importantly, the rules will not have changed. The game itself is distinct from the executable file that creates its representation.
So what does all of this mean? I’m about to tell you. It means that books, music, movies, and software are not computer data and, therefore, are not information. Now, I know you’re going to wave your hands in protest, especially with my claim that software isn’t computer data. After all, software, by definition, cannot exist except in digital form. And most software does not have a real world equivalent like a board game. But it doesn’t matter. Whether you’re talking about computer games, office suites, graphics editors, or any kind of software imaginable, the representation of that software, be it in text mode or in graphical GUI goodness, is distinct from the binary code that creates it.
I’m simplifying a bit. OK, a lot. Most of the software you use, games especially, have a lot going on behind the scenes. The computer is crunching numbers, saving files to disk, and doing a lot of work that you don’t see graphically. But, again, it doesn’t matter. That, too, is a representation of the software. Any program can be ported to multiple operating systems and CPU architectures, performing the same general operations. The binary changes, but the program itself remains largely intact. Open Office is still Open Office on multiple platforms, even though the binary data is different. And in the future, if we ever represent computer data using something other than binary, we can still port old software to the new format and the representation can, conceivably, be largely the same.
So in two posts, I’ve laid out the rationale behind my assertion that digital works are not information. You may agree with me, you may not. That’s fine. You are free to do either. Ah, there’s that word free again. He just keeps popping up. And in part 4, I’m going to tackle head on the argument that information should be free. Despite all of the effort I went to in explaining that I don’t think digital works are information. Because I really love freedom, but all of those information-should-be-free hippies keep trying to take it away from me.
Carradine and Eddings
Jun 5th
As a child, I was a rabid fan of Kung Fu. I’d be lying if I said I remember any of it, though. I was way too young. But I do recall that I wanted to be Caine. Now, David Carradine has been found swinging from a nylon rope in a Thai hotel room closet. He was 72. I can’t say I was ever very much of a Carradine fan after Kung Fu. I liked him in Lone Wolf McQuade
Then there’s David Eddings, dead at 77. I came to fantasy through Tolkien, as did many of my generation. And during the fantasy explosion of the 70s and 80s I spent countless hours browsing the sci-fi/fantasy sections of the bookstores. Eddings was always there, especially the Belgariad (now packaged in two convenient volumes: books 1-3
Books and Me
May 14th
I became an avid reader from a very young age. I spent countless hours at the school and public libraries, participated in youth summer reading programs, and generally devoured as many books as I could get my hands on. The ones that stand out most, from the ages of 7 and 8, were the old Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew books. This was in the late 70s, just before they were republished as paperbacks, and those books, old hardcovers from the 50s and 60s, were falling apart and had a musty odor that I still recall. I loved every minute of it.
Eventually, life got in the way and my reading began to taper off until, by the time I joined the Army, I rarely read at all. I guess you could call that my Dark Age. It lasted longer than I care to admit. I did pick up a few books during that time–a couple of volumes of Sherlock Holmes stories and a few from the Wheel of Time series–but leisurely reading was not a priority. By the late 90s I was buying tech books to satisfy my programming obsession, but I’d hardly apply the word leisurely to that.
A few years ago, I found myself missing my old habit, so I started expanding my collection. It began with a few fantasy novels. I wanted to catch up on the Wheel of Time, and I was really enthralled by George R. R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series. Though I loved fantasy novels as a teen, I found that these days there was very little else in the fantasy section of the bookstore that appealed to me. So I did something I’d never done before: I bought a non-fiction book.
Though you wouldn’t have known it by looking at my bookshelf at the time, I’ve always been a big history buff. I just love it. My reading as a kid wasn’t all Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew. I read as much as I could on dinosaurs, the Middle Ages, the Old West and more. Since I bought that first non-fiction book a few years ago, The New Penguin History of the World
I started this post intending to write a commentary on history writers, but the background has gone well beyond what I intended. So I’ll save that for another post. But I want to close by saying that I’m incredibly glad I rediscovered my love of books. It took me much too long to recover my old reading speed, but now I’m getting through my unread stack much more quickly than I was a year ago. That means I can buy, and read, even more books. Truly, reading is one of life’s greatest pleasures.
Pattie Boyd & Eric Clapton
Dec 28th
A few months back I was browsing my favorite bookstore and discovered that a book I had been on the lookout for had finally made it to Korea. I first saw mention of Eric Clapton’s autobiography in an interview he did with Larry King, which I saw via podcast around the beginning of this year. Being that Claption was perhaps the biggest inspiration for me to pick up a guitar when I was 16, and that I’ve been a fan of his since I began to feel music, I knew I had to have this book. So there it was on a table at Kyobo Bookstore. And right next to it was Pattie Boyd’s autobiography, about which I hadn’t yet heard anything. I bought them both and put them in the unread pile at home.
I finally got around to reading them earlier this month. I started off with Pattie Boyd’s book, Wonderful Tonight: George Harrison, Eric Clapton, and Me
Another downer was that the overall voice didn’t quite appeal to me. It tried to be conversational, but seemed stiff and rushed. At times it was almost staccatto. However, I enjoyed learning things about George Harrison and Eric Clapton that I’d never have known otherwise. Also, some of her insights into other people around them in the music world, such as the other three Beatles, were interesting nuggets to pick up. Ultimately, I discovered that I really wasn’t all that interested in Pattie Boyd’s life. I suppose that has to do with the fact that I either wasn’t around or was way too young when she was in the headlines. When she finally did show up on my radar, it was as Eric Clapton’s ex-wife. I was hoping the book would generate some sort of interest, but it really fell flat.
As soon as I put Pattie Boyd’s book down, I picked Eric Clapton’s up. Titled simply Clapton: The Autobiography
I’m not one of those people who has to know every detail about the lives of those who entertain us (and frankly, I don’t understand those who do), but I do love when one of them volunteers something that makes them seem more human. Both Clapton and Boyd, Clapton particularly, give up more information than most people would be comfortable revealing about themselves. Clapton’s portrayal of his drug and alcohol addictions are honest and merciless. But like his ex-wife, Clapton also gives insight into the people who inhabit their world. Alongside the roller coaster that is the life of Eric Clapton, we see little nuggets like this one about Mick Jagger:
…the Stones came through town on their Steel Wheels tour, and Carla mentioned that she was a fan of theirs and asked me if I would take her to see them. We went to the show, and afterward I took her backstage to meet the guys. I remember saying to Jagger, “Please, Mick, not this one. I think I’m in love.” In the past he had made several unsuccessful passes at Pattie, and I knew Carla would appeal to his eye. For all my pleadings, it was only a matter of days before they started a clandestine affair.
Once in the 60s, Clapton met a lost old lady on the subway while he was on his way to play guitar at a Beatles show. She was a Beatles fan, so he invited her along and introduced her to them before the show. That resulted in this little nugget about John Lennon:
They were getting ready to go on, but they took a moment and were really friendly and polite to her. But when we got to John, and I introduced her, he made a face of mock boredom and started doing wanking motions inside his coat. I was really shocked and quite offended, because I felt responsible for this harmless little old lady, and in a sense, of course, he was insulting me. I got to know John quite well later in our lives, and we were friends I suppose, but I was always aware that he was capable of doing some pretty weird stuff.
These are people we place on pedestals and idolize because of their talent. In some sense, I think it’s easy for most to overlook that they are human just like the rest of us. It’s little gems like this that remind us of that.
It’s interesting to contrast the two books, particularly the bits that overlap and how they each remember them. Also, the approach they take to their stories is very different. Boyd’s story paints her mostly as a victim, largely ignoring any responsibility she may have had for any bad things that happened in her life. On the one hand, that’s really part of her story. She’s telling us that she lived most of her life passively, letting things happen to her. It was only as she got older that she began to assert herself and take control of her life. But she rationalizes a lot, looking for somewhere to lay the blame, giving the book the feeling that she’s not being forthright in her version of things. Clapton, on the other hand, is brutal and blunt. His addictions are painted as the root cause for many of his problems, but he makes no bones about taking responsibility. He’s telling you his story not as a victim, but as someone who made bad decisions that had worse consequences.
Fans of Pattie Boyd will definitely want her book, since it’s always nice to put a human face on someone you’ve idolized for any period of time. But if you don’t know much about her to begin with, you ought to just skip it unless you’re extremely curious. There are better books to read. Clapton’s book, on the other hand, should be entertaining for anyone. It should stand up as a good read even if you’ve never heard of Eric Clapton.
Not So Titanic Rivets
Apr 15th
History has always held a deep fascination for me. I have an interest in a broad swath of it, but I’m most fascinated by times long past, such as ancient civilizations (particularly Egypt, Greece and Rome) and the Dark and Middle Ages. I do enjoy modern history, just not with the same passion. But one event in recent history that has gripped me since childhood is the sinking of the Titanic.
I don’t know why I’ve been so enthralled by this story, nor do I remember when I first took interest in it. I do know I was quite young. Over the years, I’ve seen every movie and documentary, and read every book, about the Titanic that I could get my hands on. Now, there is a new book coming that I’m dying to read.
Some years ago, Tim Foecke, a metallurgist, posited the theory that weak rivets in the ship’s hull caused it to sink so quickly. This was after it was discovered that there was not a huge gaping hole in the side of the ship as had been believed. Now, Foecke and others on his team are confident that they have enough evidence to say definitively that low grade rivets are indeed to blame. He and fellow metallurgist Jennifer Hooper McCarty have published a book, What Really Sank the Titanic
I’m looking forward to reading this book. There are several others I want to read that I’ve not been able to find here in Korea. I suppose it’s time to make one of my semi-annual bulk orders, where I get several books sent here from Amazon in one shot to reduce shipping costs. I can keep dreaming that they’ll open a Seoul warehouse.
Lunar New Year
Feb 19th
Lunar New Year’s day was Sunday. That took me away from the computer for a few days with the in-laws. Lots of food. Lots and lots of it actually. I took it easy on the alcohol this year though, so no massive hangovers or silly drunken takes to relate. It was still all very tiring though, so I’ve spent most of the day today (it being Monday evening here and the last day of the holiday) reclined on the sofa finishing off A Storm of Swords
I’ll be back to my regular atheistic, left-wing ranting in a day or two.
The Time Traveler’s Wife
May 19th
I picked up The Time Traveler’s Wife
Henry first meets Clare when he is 28 and she is 20, but she first meets him when he is 36 and she is 6. Her past is his future. Imagine how funky that would be. Watching how they deal with the situation, with the revelations Henry makes as he puts together the pieces of his future, how the disease affects their attempts at having children, and how a future or past Henry steps in now and then when the present Henry is hurtling through time somewhere… it’s incredibly engrossing.
One of the side effects of Henry’s jaunts through time is that nothing else goes with him. He vanishes from his present and finds himself naked somewhere in his past or his future. His first task is always to find clothes. Long term stays require him to find money. Sometimes his needs require him to pickpocket, or even mug someone. He stays in top shape as he often finds himself running for his life. Sometimes he stays in the past or future for minutes, sometimes for hours, or days. When he returns to his present, sometimes he has been gone 10 minutes, sometimes 10 days. His life is horribly unstable, but Clare is his rock.
The bond between Henry and Clare is strong. It gives them both strength through times of trial. As I read the story, I couldn’t help but draw parallels between their lives and the lives of normal people. We all face times of crisis, times when our lives seem out of our control. It is in those times that our relationships face their toughest tests, when the love we have for someone is what keeps us going.
If you are married and, after reading this book, you can equate your relationship with that of Henry and Clare, then you truly are blessed.
The Da Vinci Disappointment
Apr 28th
So I finished The Da Vinci Code a few days ago. I’m still scratching my head. Not from any mystical revelations or mindbending plot elements in the book, mind you. No, my puzzlement comes from the book’s success. It was an utter disappointment.
Angels & Demons is a much better story. It was paced well and kept me intrigued through the entire book. DVC, on the other hand, started out interesting but became rather bland as the story progressed. The plot twists in A & D were really well done. They were set up well and took me by surprise. More importantly, they made sense. In DVC, the major plot twist near the end was just silly. I attribute that to poor set up. And the biggest failing of DVC is poor pacing. It just felt like the story wasn’t ready to end, but the end came abruptly anyway. Furthermore, I really felt the ending was anticlimatic. It just wasn’t gratifying at all.
The best books leave you wishing for more when you put them down. Some books, like A & D, don’t quite achieve that plateau but at least leave you satisfied. DVC made me wish I could get back the time I spent reading it.
The Da Vinci Bandwagon
Apr 25th
I’m a big fan of Umberto Eco. His tale of cabalistic intrigue, Foucault’s Pendulum, is very near the top of my favorites list (and that’s saying a lot, considering that my favorites tend to be from the fantasy genre). My first reading of it in the late 90s left me scratching my head to some extent (I’m a smart guy, but Mr. Eco is leaps and bounds beyond me), but it did reignite my interest in the Knights Templar, Illuminati, Rosicrucians and other secret Orders of conspiratorial repute. I was really into all of that as a teenager (perhaps because of my exposure to the Necronomicon shortly after being introduced to Dungeons & Dragons) Ultimately, it was Eco that caused me to break down and buy Brown.I normally don’t go for the current phenomenon of the printed world. I have yet to read any of the Harry Potter books and doubt that I ever will, though I did see the movies (and own the DVDs). The overnight success of the Da Vinci Code put it sqaure on my list of Books to Stay Away From (though I decided to see the movie as soon as it was first announced). Like “Harry Potter” and “J.K. Rowlings”, I kept hearing “Da Vinci Code” and “Dan Brown” every time I turned around. Even here in Korea. And then I started seeing Umberto Eco’s name coming up in Da Vinci Code reviews and comparisons being drawn. I was highly skeptical that such a popular book could come anywhere near Eco’s level, but my curiosity was finally aroused. Read the rest of this entry »
