Goodbye old friend…
It was a long time coming considering that the browser originated out of those involved with the original NCSA Mosaic project in the 90s. When Netscape Navigator was launched in 1994, it was seen as the superior browser to the original graphical Mosaic, and this eventually lead to its demise in 1997. In fact, Mosaic was completely gone from most people’s computers when Microsoft determined that there was no Mosaic code left in their Internet Explorer software (this was when 7.0 was released).
Personally, I used Netscape up until version 4. When Microsoft came out with version 4.0 of their browser, it was decided by many (including myself) that it was time to jump ship and use the browser that was integrated with Windows. Netscape’s usage declined rapidly and even though there was a “browser war†in the late 90s, it was quite clear who the overall winner was going to be.
Eventually it got bought by AOL and eventually forked off to become two different entities. The Mozilla Project eventually became the open-source code base for Netscape’s later versions and because of this, it’s not entirely dead. Firefox and Thunderbird have both proven to be proven competitors to Microsoft’s offerings.
I think that the strangest overall feature of more recent versions of Netscape was the fact that you could switch rendering engines on the Windows version.
To leave you all off, here’s how Netscape Navigator 4 (which is in my opinion the last best version) would function today…
Buying a browser or associated software is a bit strange to me these days.
The default home page it would go to doesn’t exist any longer.
The lack of CSS support, PNG rendering, and modern HTML tags makes my blog lack any sort of design.
Untraceable: Another hacker thriller gone wrong!
With a new year comes a new crop of terrible movies. One movie in particular is Untraceable, a psycho-hacker-killer thriller where someone has managed to rig up a web server to slowly kill someone by having some liquid injected into his prey every time someone visits an untraceable website. You can view the awful trailer and see for yourself how terrible it looks and will likely be.
While the idea of rigging up a web server to do such a task is entirely plausible, I laugh at the fact that the IP address is entirely untraceable to the point where they have no idea where the web server is or anything. From the looks of it, the killer is placing some sort of camera hooked to a broadband line. If my assumption is right, even with the fastest connection, if that is the main feed for the video and the traffic as a whole, I’d be curious to what the hell the killer is spending in bandwidth per month. I think that working for an ISP for so long has made me think this way, sadly.
I managed to snag some screenshots from the dumb trailer and already I can see that this movie is destined to be the 2008 movie year’s first train wreck.
Just another day in the high-tech world of counter-cyber crime! Looks like she’s using Windows Vista!
Hey! I found this website! It’s a real killer! Too soon? Shit. Well, we better look!
What the hell? This looks like a bloody anti-smoking website! Why is his jaw all fucked up?
Shit! This guy is being killed! Oh! I hope that you don’t mind, but I placed an out-of-order system log from your Mac on to my computer. It might seem useless, but maybe it will help us figure out why these reserved IPs are blackholed!
Yo! We found this killer website! Don’t go to it, but here’s the web address! If you go to this web address, you’ll end up being an accessory to murder. Don’t go to this web address that I have given everyone here in their notes and have pasted on this whiteboard to the left of me.
Wait a second…? Why is the hostname resolving to that IP address, but the ICMP replies are from somewhere else? Holy shit! This is one of the oldest ARIN registrants out there! Maybe we should look into the address that ARIN is giving us?
I am using my kick-ass dual-monitor set up not only to assist in a murder but to also check out some useless file relating to my fonts! Don’t mind the lotion next to the left monitor, guys.
Well, the IPs are changing around again. Maybe it’s some sort of bizarre load-balancer? He could have multiple pipes? One of the IPs belongs to a guy in California. The guy who owns it works for Cisco, which must mean that he is an elite computer hacker!
The killer has enough time to put some sort of remote controlled camera on some very expensive BMW car. Not only does he stuff a body in the trunk, break FCC interference policies by somehow getting the video feed to show up on their LCD monitor, but he blows a few ten thousand on a fancy car.
Not only that, but he can hack into your car and remotely turn it off! Shit. I will never buy a Ford vehicle with Microsoft’s Sync product. I don’t need some douchebag remotely turning my car off like this.
Here’s the deal, guys. Give me the IPs, some information about your network and where stuff is located, and I will spend the entire day going through your building, following cables to wherever the server is located. Servers have gone missing before, and I am sure that with enough time, I could solve your mystery so you can get this ‘wily’ hacker off of your backs.
Get to know your CRIA lobbyists!
Following up with my previous entry, I decided to do some research into who exactly represents the Canadian Recording Industry Assocation (CRIA) to our members in Parliament.
Thanks to the Office of the Registrar of Lobbyists, we can determine who represents who when it comes to matters of pressure on the government.
Who is exactly involved in the Canadian copyright review debacle?
While the story has been blogged to death, not much has come out on who is likely involved in the whole copyright review mess that failed to make it into parliament last week. However, every lobbyist is required to register themselves in a publically searchable database that is viewable online.
Doing a simple search for "recording" brought up some interesting results!
Registration type: Consultant Lobbyist
Lobbyist number: 0000783
Registration number: 0000783-86
Effective date: 2007-06-06
Termination date: 2007-11-29Prefix: Mr.
Last Name: GERVAIS
First Name: PHILIPPE
Preferred Language: English
Position Title: SENIOR CONSULTANT
Name of Lobbyist's Firm: The Capital Hill Group Inc.Regulation: Bill C60 and act to amend the copyright act.
Policy or Program: Review of Copyright act.
That's only a sampling of what I managed to find. His lobbyist registration was up on the 29th of last month and was renewed the day of. His was not the only registration that was due to expire on that day as you can see in this image:
One has to wonder what sparked the act to get reviewed now. If I could only find out about what meetings Mr. Prentice was having before he got this all started...
Get to know your CRIA lobbyists!
Following up with my previous entry, I decided to do some research into who exactly represents the Canadian Recording Industry Assocation (CRIA) to our members in Parliament.
Thanks to the Office of the Registrar of Lobbyists, we can determine who represents who when it comes to matters of pressure on the government.
Currently, there are two listed lobbyists representing the industry, and they both come from the consulting group, The Capital Hill Group. The two members of this organization involved are Sandra Graham (#22591) and Philippe Gervais (#783).
According to the registry, Sandra's subject-matter particulars include copyright reform, intellectual property (IP) rights reforms, and government response to piracy and counterfeiting reports from committees. Her principle client (within CRIA) is Graham Henderson, who was Senior Vice-President of Business Affairs and eCommerce for Universal Music Canada, but is now President of the association.
In regards to Mr. Gervais, he has been involved in the creation of Bill C60, which was a previous attempt at copyright reform under the Liberal government in 2005. His principle client is Richard Pfohl (spelt as "Phfol" on the government site), and he is involved with legal affairs for the association. The ironic thing about Richard's involvement with CRIA is his linked profile states that he was an Executive Editor for the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review.
Out of all of this, there is one thing that stands out: why did their registrations get terminated and then reactivated on the same day?
Simple.
Before November 30th, the two members were only involved with the Department of Canadian Heritage, which was the focal point of copyright reform in the past. Bev Oda was the previous minister, and while now she is Minister for International Cooperation, in her last election, there was controversy over campaign funding by US copyright proponents. Now that she's no longer involved with the department, the lobbyists had to swim to another pool.
Hence, the lobbyists reregistered so they could then be involved not only with the Heritage department, but also Industry Canada, who of course, is chaired by Minister of Industry, Jim Prentice--he was previously involved with Indian Affairs.
The staggering thing is that this story broke before November 30th. One has to wonder if these lobbyists and the minister may have broken any laws in regards to all of this. I wish I was versed enough in Canadian law that I could come to this conclusion, but sadly I cannot.
Update at 11:11 am: Thanks to Michael Geist for noting an error in Mr. Hederson's current position within the CRIA.