I love this drawing! I’ve always been charmed by cartoonists’ ability to
capture an essence in a seemingly simple drawing. Objects are reduced to
stereotypes, but with some whimsy thrown in. Ben has always had this gift: to
create just the right stroke to perfectly express an attitude or feeling.
Here Sleepy is snug in his bed, covered by a blanket. Even in his custom
bed, he’s too long to fit, but he’s comfortable. The pillow isn’t shaped like a
real pillow, but it’s exactly our cartoon Platonic ideal of a pillow.
When I first thought of getting a mascot, I wanted it to be a snake in bed,
because of the literal meaning of “coverage.” But I threw the question out to
Twitter to see what came up:
Looking for ideas of what a logo for coverage․py could look like. No idea is too crazy! Please RT
As many of you have no doubt heard, control of the .org registry has been sold
to private interests. There have been attempts to call them to reason, like
Save .ORG, but let’s be realistic: they knew what
they’re doing is wrong, the whole time. If they were a commercial entity, our
appeals would fall on deaf ears and that would be the end of it. But, they’re
not a commercial entity - so our appeals may fall on deaf ears, but that doesn’t
have to be the end of it.
The level of corruption on display by the three organizations involved in this
scam: ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), ISOC (The
Internet Society), and PIR (Public Interest Registry), is astounding and very
illegal. If you are not familiar with the matter, click this to read a summary:
Summary of the corrupt privatization of .org
The governance of names on the internet is kind of complicated. ISOC
oversees a lot of activities in internet standards and governance, but their
role in this mess is as the parent company of PIR. PIR is responsible for
the .org registry, which oversees the governance of .org directly and
collects fees for every sale of a .org domain. ICANN is the broader
authority which oversees all domain allocation on the internet, and also
collects a fee for every domain sold. There's a complex web of documents and
procedures which govern these three organizations, and the name system as a
whole, and all three of them were involved in this process. Each of these
organizations is a non-profit, except for PIR, which in the course of this
deal is trying to convert to a B corp.
ICANN can set price limits on the sale of .org domains. In March of 2019,
they proposed removing these price caps entirely. During the period for
public comment, they received 3,300 comments against, and 6 in favor. On May
13, they removed these price caps anyway.
In November 2019, ISOC announced that they had approved the sale of PIR, the
organization responsible for .org, to Ethos Capital, for an unspecified
amount. According to
the minutes, the decision to approve this sale was unanimously voted on
by the board. Additionally, it seems that Goldman Sachs had been involved in
the sale to some degree.
Fadi Chehadé became the CEO of ICANN in 2012. In 2016, he leaves his
position before it expires to start a consulting company, and he later joins
Abry Partners. One of the 3 partners is Erik Brooks. They later acquire
Donuts, a private company managing domains. Donuts co-founder Jon Nevett
becomes the CEO of PIR in December 2018. On May 7th, Chehadé registers
EthosCapital.com, and on May 13th ICANN decided to remove the price caps
despite 0.2% support from the public. On May 14th, the following day, Ethos
Capital was incorporated, with Brooks as the CEO. In November 2019, ISOC
approved the acquisition of PIR by Ethos Capital, a for-profit company.
These are the names of the criminals who sold the internet. If you want to
read more, Private Internet Access has a good write-up.
Okay, now let's talk about what you can do about it.
If you are familiar with the .org heist, then like me, you’re probably pissed
off. Here’s how you can take action: all of these organizations are 501c3
non-profits. The sale of a non-profit to a for-profit entity like this is
illegal without very specific conditions being met. Additionally, this kind of
behavior is not the sort the IRS likes to see in a tax-exempt organization.
Therefore, we can take the following steps to put a stop to this:
Write to the CA and VA attorney general offices encouraging them to
investigate the misbehavior of these three non-profits, which are
incorporated in their respective states.
File form 13909 with the IRS, encouraging them to review the organization’s
This kind of behavior is illegal. The sale of a non-profit requires a letter
from the Attorneys General in both California (ICANN) and Virginia (ISOC, PIR).
Additionally, much of this behavior qualifies as “self-dealing”, or leveraging
one’s power within an organization for their own benefit, rather than the
benefit of the organization. To report this, I’ve prepared a letter to the CA
and VA Attorney’s General offices, which you can read here:
I encourage you to consider writing a letter of your own, but I would not
recommend copying and pasting this letter. However, this kind of behavior is
also illegal in the eyes of the IRS, and a form is provided for this purpose.
Form 13909 is the appropriate means for reporting this behavior. You can
download a pre-filled form here, and I do encourage you to submit one this
This only includes complaints for ICANN and ISOC, as PIR is seeking to lose its
non-profit status anyway. You can print out the PDF, fill in your details on
both pages, and mail it to the address printed on the form; or you can download
the ODG, open it up with LibreOffice Draw, and fill in the remaining details
digitally, then email it to the address shown on the page.1
Happy Thanksgiving! Funny how this all happened right when the American public
would be distracted…
Crash course in LibreOffice Draw: press F2, then click and drag to make a new textbox. Select text and use Ctrl+[ to reduce the font size to something reasonable. The red button on the toolbar along the top will export the result as a PDF. ↩
Fedora Toolbox is a tool for developing and debugging software that basically is a frontend to the Podman container system. A simple way to test applications without getting billions of dependencies and cluttering up your operating system. First, Podman (Pod Manager tool) is a daemon less container engine for developing, managing, and running OCI Containers on your Linux System. With[...]
Back in the '00s, I said blogging was "like sending email that's 'cc:world'." That was kind of the way my old blog (1999-2007) worked. The subject was the headline and each post was as short or long as I liked—as an email also might be. And, like an email, it was personal. I was speaking for myself.
These days I write on four blogs: my personal one, ProjectVRM, Customer Commons, and here. Of those four, only this one is fully* personal, and only this one runs on a writing platform like my old blog had. (No surprise there, because both platforms were creations of our blogfather, Dave Winer.) Sometimes I also cross-post to Medium, which is now less leveraged than it used to be. (I can explain later, but it's beside the point of this post.) And I tweet.
*A bit of explanation: my personal blog is a Harvard one, and so is ProjectVRM's. Customer Commons' is also not mine. And I'm mindful of those institutions when I write there. Here the institution is me.
Bigger than all four of those blogs is Linux Journal, where I wrote a great deal, including what amounted to blog posts on its website, for 25 years. That ended when Linux Journal ceased business in August. Also, as of today the entire site, with all its archives, is offline, erasing a third to a half of what I've written online so far.
While I'm hoping that the owner will bring the site back up again (they did promise to keep it up), the prospect of losing the whole thing has shaken my belief that the Web itself will ever be a true place for archiving anything. Instead it's a whiteboard.† And writing on a whiteboard is not a prospect that energizes me. Quite the opposite, in fact. Especially when so much of my online work is gone. (Again, at least for now.)
Here's another depressing thing: Google and Bing searches are now biased for traffic rather than links. I know this for two reasons. One is that I planted keyword easter eggs in some old and well-linked-to blog posts, which both search engines used to find; and now they bring up goose eggs: nada. (I'd tell you the keyword, but that would blow the test.) The other is that links to this blog don't cause it to show up in search engines, but visits to this blog do cause it to show up—at least for me—presumably because Google and Bing watched one person come here, and customized the search result just for that person (moi).
Or so it seems. I really don't know.
Are there studies on any of this... about how the Web is a whiteboard, or how search engines are becoming biassed for observed visits rather than for inbound links?
I suppose studies like that would be hard or impossible, given the operational opacity of search engines, their tendency to change constantly, and the ways they are rigged to personalize results.
So I'm in something of a liminal state right now, wondering where to invest my ceaseless writing energies. At the moment the Web is looking less appealing than ever. My mind might change, especially if we succeed in getting Linux Journal back up. But that's where I am right now.
†I first wrote about this in Linux Journal back in 2003, noting a split between the "static" Web that was like a library (with its "locations," "sites," and "domains" you could "visit" and "browse"), and the "live" web of blogs and posts. I also wrote about it at greater length in 2005, when we had the first hints toward what became social media. Here's a link to it I just found on Google. It currently goes nowhere. And, if the Linux Journal site doesn't come back up, Google's search engine will forget it, and the live Web's whiteboard will be wiped clean.
Cleanly isolating vocals from drums, bass, piano, and other musical accompaniment is the dream of every mashup artist, karaoke fan, and producer. Commercial solutions exist, but can be expensive and unreliable. Techniques like phase cancellation have very mixed results.
The engineering team behind streaming music service Deezer just open-sourced Spleeter, their audio separation library built on Python and TensorFlow that uses machine learning to quickly and freely separate music into stems. (Read more in today’s announcement.)
You can train it yourself if you have the resources, but the three models they released already far surpass any available free tool that I know of, and rival commercial plugins and services. The library ships with three pre-trained models:
Two stems – Vocals and Other Accompaniment
Four stems – Vocals, Drums, Bass, Other
Five stems – Vocals, Drums, Bass, Piano, Other
It took a couple minutes to install the library, which includes installing Conda, and processing audio was much faster than expected.
On my five-year-old MacBook Pro using the CPU only, Spleeter processed audio at a rate of about 5.5x faster than real-time for the simplest two-stem separation, or about one minute of processing time for every 5.5 minutes of audio. Five-steam separation took around three minutes for 5.5 minutes of audio.
When running on a GPU, the Deezer team report speeds 100x faster than real-time for four stems, converting 3.5 hours of music in less than 90 seconds on a single GeForce GTX 1080.
But how are the results? I tried a handful of tracks across multiple genres, and all performed incredibly well. Vocals sometimes get a robotic autotuned feel, but the amount of bleed is shockingly low relative to other solutions.
I ran several songs through the two-stem filter, which is the fastest and most useful. The 30-second samples are the separations from the simplest two-stem model, with links to the original studio tracks where available.
Lizzo – “Truth Hurts”
Compare the above to the isolated vocals generated by PhonicMind, a commercial service that uses machine learning to separate audio, starting at $3.99 per song. The piano is audible throughout PhonicMind’s track.
Led Zeppelin – “Whole Lotta Love”
The original isolated vocals from the master tapes for comparison. Spleeter gets a bit confused with the background vocals, with the secondary slide guitar bleeding into the vocal track.
Lil Nas X w/Billy Ray Cyrus – “Old Town Road (Remix)”
Part of the beat makes it into Lil Nas X’s vocal track. No studio stems are available, but a fan used the Diplo remix to create this vocals-only track for comparison.
Marvin Gaye – “I Heard It Through the Grapevine”
Some of the background vocals get included in both tracks here, which is probably great for karaoke, but may not be ideal for remixing. Compare this to 1:10 in the studio vocals.
Billie Eilish – “Bad Guy”
I thought this one would be a disaster—the vocals are heavily processed and lower in the mix with a dynamic bass dominating the song—but it worked surprisingly well, though some of the snaps bleed through.
Van Halen – “Runnin’ With The Devil”
Spleeter had a difficult time with this one, but still not bad. You can compare the results generated by Spleeter to the famously viral isolated vocals by David Lee Roth, dry with no vocal effects applied.
The release of Spleeter comes shortly after the release of Open-Unmix, another open-source separation library for Python that similarly uses deep neural networks with TensorFlow for source separation.
In my testing, Open-Unmix separated audio at about 35% of the speed of Spleeter, didn’t support MP3 files, and generated noticeably worse results. Compare the output from Open-Unmix below for Lizzo’s isolated vocals, with drums clearly audible once they kick in at the 0:18 mark.
The quality issues can likely be attributed to the model released with Open-Unmix, which was trained on a relatively small set of 150 songs available in the MUSDB18 dataset. The team behind Open Unmix is also working on “UMX PRO,” a more extensive model trained on a larger dataset, but it’s not publicly available for testing.
Years ago, I made a goofy experiment called Waxymash, taking four random isolated music tracks off YouTube, and colliding them into the world’s worst mashup. But I was mostly limited to a small number of well-known songs that had their stems leak online, or the few that could be separated cleanly with channel manipulation.
With processing speeds at 100 times faster than real-time playback on a single GPU, it’s now possible to turn all recorded music into a mashup or karaoke without access to the source audio. It may not be legal, but it’s definitely possible.
What would you build with it? I’d love to hear your ideas.