The key is that the error involves calling a COM object. The project contains a reference to the interop for that COM object: Interop.MMCLTSVCS.dll. However it does not contain a reference to the interop for one of the other COM objects that Interop.MMCLTSVCS.dll uses. Apparently this works fine under the IDE but fails with an obscure error message under MSBuild.

Visual Studio’s “Unused References” function provides an easy way to get this error. It will helpfully remove any references that are not used by your .NET code, without considering whether they are used by any of the referenced interops.

EFF’s Fred von Lohmann provides an obituary:

In Memoriam: Ed Foster, 1949-2008

This application has failed to start because the application configuration is incorrect. Reinstalling the application may fix this problem.

Looking in the Security Event Log I found the following messages:

Generate Activation Context failed for C:\ParsII\bin\server\CCSWinService2.exe. Reference error message: The operation completed successfully.

Syntax error in manifest or policy file “C:\ParsII\bin\server\CCSWinService2.exe.Config” on line 1.

The last one was the key. In the app config file the first line was

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="Windows-1252"?>


That should be perfectly legal for an XML file, but deleting it caused everything to work perfectly.

Reflecting back on my recent trip to Beijing…one of the most striking things was the contrast between personal, day-to-day freedom in Beijing and the United States (especially NYC/Los Angeles/Orange County). I’m not talking about political representation or freedom to read whatever I felt like, but just the simple ability to go whereever I felt like going without being hassled. To my surprise, by that measure Beijing came off way better than the United States does these days, and that doesn’t speak well for the U.S.
…
Somehow I thought a one-party, authoritarian state would be more oppressive than this. At least in the capital, Beijing compares favorably to major U.S. cities. To be honest, that doesn’t speak well for the U.S. If we can’t be less of a police state than a one-party, nominally Communist nation like China, then something has gone seriously wrong.

(Read the whole thing)

Back during the Cold War, right-wing types used to make a big distinction between “totalitarian states” (bad) and “authoritarian states” (not so bad.)

A totalitarian state (Russia, China or Nazi Germany) would try to monitor everything its citizens did and demanded constant declarations of effusive loyalty. An authoritarian state (Franco’s Spain) would generally leave people alone if they kept quiet and stayed out of politics.

By this definition China has clearly become an authoritarian state. But if America is becoming more of a police state than China (in terms of surveillance, etc.) then what does that make us?

Well, for one thing I suspect that Harold is much more sensitive than the average American to the amount of monitoring that our government does, and much less sensitive than the average Chinese to the extent to which their government monitors them.

In any case, America still has the strongest protections for free speech in the world. With very limited exceptions you can say anything you want, regardless of whom it offends. As long as that remains true we can’t be called either authoritarian or totalitarian.

On the other hand, public support for free speech does not run very deep. (Most people, after all, don’t like to be offended.) It is easy to imagine free speech being abolished overnight in a national emergency. Even more likely, it might be gradually eaten away under the demands of a horde of special interests, each wanting to impose their own “reasonable limits.”

If that happens, we really will be less free than the Chinese.

Mueller wants to convince the Internet Service Providers to change they Terms of Service to force their customers to “consent” to having the FBI monitor everything they do without a warrant. If the ISPs refuse (as they probably would for fear of lawsuits) then he wants Congress to pass legislation requiring it.

He justifies this by invoking the usual suspects (terrorism and cyberattacks) but of course the surveillance would be quickly extended to cover lesser crimes like copyright violation. It is amusing to imagine the FBI locking up millions of file sharers, but probably they would just prosecute a small number of people to serve as examples.

SmartWater is a liquid with a unique identifier linked to a particular owner. “The idea is for me to paint this stuff on my valuables as proof of ownership,” I wrote when I first learned about the idea. “I think a better idea would be for me to paint it on your valuables, and then call the police.”
…
If more people had a security mindset, services that compromise privacy wouldn’t have such a sizable market share — and Facebook would be totally different. Laptops wouldn’t be lost with millions of unencrypted Social Security numbers on them, and we’d all learn a lot fewer security lessons the hard way. The power grid would be more secure. Identity theft would go way down. Medical records would be more private. If people had the security mindset, they wouldn’t have tried to look at Britney Spears’ medical records, since they would have realized that they would be caught.

This seems a little grim, but it would be a useful counterbalance to the general tendency to enthusiastly embrace any plausible-sounding proposal without thinking through the consequences.

In particular I eliminated the use of pixel metrics, replacing it with logical sizes (inches and points.) I also reduced the dependence on bitmap images for formatting and fixed some malformed relative URLs, which Firefox and IE handled correctly but Safari didn’t like.

If the site now looks WORSE in your browser, let me know what your configuration is and I’ll see what I can do.

Attempted solution: local authorites commision an independent audit of the machines to determine the source of the problem.

Checkmate: the vendor prevents the audit by threatening to sue to protect its “Intellectual Property.”

Story on Ars Technica.

This is exactly why all voting machines should be required to use open source software throughout: to make sure that effective audits will always be possible. Of course no commercially available voting machines actually do this. As always the industry’s motto is “Trust us. Shut up. Just trust us.”

UPDATE: A judge orders the review to proceed, although the report won’t be available in time to do anything about it before the November elections.

Actually I’m pretty sure that she never intended to claim that she invented the term. That is a misunderstanding imposed by others. She just said that she found “the first genuine computer bug,” meaning the first bug that was actually an insect.