Bitten

Finished Kelley Armstrong’s Bitten this morning. It was a wonderful book; I can’t believe it was her first. I was very skeptical of the whole ‘modern day werewolves’ theme, to be honest, but damned if she didn’t pull it off nicely, telling us a riveting story while giving us glimpses into the whole werewolf mystique and leaving room for many more stories to come (I hope).

Overall she kept a tight leash on things (yes, pun intended) until the very last parts of the story where she got a little careless about leaving bodies behind, so to speak. This is forgivable in that the reader is so caught up in things by then that they’re probably just as happy to not have to pause for the explanation of how a fight scene is cleaned up. Ideally, though, we wouldn’t be left with questions of “What will the police think when they find….” and so forth.

That’s a minor nit, though. The story moved along really nicely; a real page turner. Elena is a believable modern day heroine. She’s got flaws and she has some very dense moments (perhaps a few too many — several times I was shouting the Bitten equivalent of “DON’T GO IN THE BASEMENT!”) but she’s still likable and a very sympathetic character.

I’m looking forward to reading more from Ms. Armstrong.

Video game ‘sparked hammer murder’

CNN.com – Video game ‘sparked hammer murder’

Here we go again. The old “Videogames turn kids into killers” saw. You knew it was coming when Manhunt was published.

And honestly, while I certainly don’t think that this kid went apeshit on his friend because of playing Manhunt, I also don’t see the need for games that are this violent.

I’m not saying the company doesn’t have a legal right to make and sell them. I’m just not seeing the need for this much glorification of violence, personally.

Yes, it was rated for mature audiences but the facts are, at this stage of the game, its still too easy for kids to get ahold of mature-rated games to push things this far. It shouldn’t be that way, but we don’t live in a perfect world.

Tech giants go for the games

Tech giants go for the games

Interesting piece, but in some ways these guys still don’t get it.

“Sharding” is a commonly accepted technology limitation now, he said, but “I’m not so sure consumers are going to be willing to put up with that in the next generation of online games.”

Sojourn’s Cerra agreed that improvements in server and networking technology will change what consumers expect from online games, with larger online worlds and faster responses becoming key. “Things like having a no-sharded world will be real differentiation factors for a successful multiplayer game,” he said.

I’d love to know what they’re basing this ‘wisdom’ on. Among my friends, I can’t recall ever hearing “Gee, if only all the players were on the same server.” In fact, I hear quite the opposite. Some people want to play on a designated RolePlay server, others want to play on a Player-vs-Player server, for instance.

People complain a lot about crowding now. This isn’t just about the network connectivity. If you have an audience of 10,000 users spread over 5 servers, your gameworld only has to support 2000 people; I’m talking content here. You need quests to keep 2000 people happy. You need enough geography for 2000 people to fit on. On the other hand, if all 10,000 of your users are on one server, you need to build 5 times the quests and supply a world that has 5 times as much geography, or else you’re going to be crowding players.

And crowded players are unhappy players.

New York Times hacker Adrian Lamo gets home detention

New York Times hacker Adrian Lamo gets home detention

I remember seeing this guy on TechTV’s The Screensavers. Then, after the warrant was issued, they did a phone interview with him while he was on the lam, so to speak.

Back then the story we heard was different. That Lamo had hacked into the Times, made a few minor changes to prove he was there, and then notified The Times that he’d hacked into their network so they could fix the security flaws. There was no mention of LexisNexis back then.

The story was he’d done the same thing to other companies (such as Yahoo) who had thanked him for his help. He was definitely portrayed as a “White Hat” hacker.

So what’s the true story, I wonder? Let’s do some digging.

In fact, in Sept. 2003 IDG News Service posted:

His surrender followed reports last week that the FBI was investigating Lamo’s alleged unauthorized intrusion into the internal networks of The New York Times Co. in February 2002 (see story). The Times learned of the break-in after Lamo contacted the company through SecurityFocus reporter Kevin Poulsen, according to Christine Mohan, a spokeswoman for the newspaper.

Lamo frequently trespassed on the networks of prominent companies, uncovering security holes and accessing sensitive information. He then informed the companies of his exploits and often worked with them, as a consultant, to close the holes.

‘Homeless Hacker’ Lamo surrenders to feds

and in Feb 2002, Computerworld posted:

Toby Usnik, a Times spokesman, confirmed that the company had been notified of the security breach and has since fixed the holes that allowed Lamo to enter the intranet.

Security holes closed in New York Times intranet after hacker intrusion

But in the recent IDG News Service story, we read:

Lamo confessed to the Times break-in during an interview with Securityfocus.com, a computer security news Web site, in February 2002. That confession prompted an internal investigation by the Times that uncovered evidence of Lamo’s activities, and resulted in a case being opened by the FBI.

But no mention of the fact that Lamo had initiated the contact via SecurityFocus.

History is indeed written by the victors, eh?