Tag Archives: Internet

Time spent on Internet goes toward social networks

Matthew Lasar at Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/author/matthew-lasar/) reports that “[…] Just in case you needed further confirmation that blogs, social networks, and games are overtaking everything else on the ‘Net, Nielsen has released its latest statistics. They show that Americans now spend almost a quarter of their PC/laptop days and nights on social networking sites and blogs. That’s a 43 percent jump from a year ago. Social networking now has a 22.7 percent share of the PC pie, while online games get a 10.2 percent share (up 10 percent from last year). […]” (full article at http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/08/nielsen-social-networking-and-gaming-up-email-uncertain.ars).

This, of course, cannot be a surprise, since this desire we all have to communicate to everybody.

But is very important for actual and possible impacts this trend will have on economy and behaviour.

I think that what we will read again on this topic is the new definition of privacy (with everything and everyone going into social networks, which will be the border line for what is considered private?) and security (with more firms going to provide stronger and more flexible security solutions to allow reasonable access to data stored).

This post as a comment also at http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/08/nielsen-social-networking-and-gaming-up-email-uncertain.ars?comments=1&p=20673891#comment-20673891

The closest thing to world power

Rosa Golijan at Gizmodo reports a news presented also by BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/bristol/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8855000/8855460.stm) and Popsci (http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-07/order-seven-cyber-guardians-around-world-now-hold-keys-internet) on seven people choosen to have the keys to restart the internet “[…] The basic idea is that in the event of an Internet catastrophe, the DNSSEC (domain name system security) could be damaged or compromised and we’d be left without a way to verify if a URL is pointing to the correct website.A minimum of five of the seven keyholders – one each from Britain, the U.S., Burkina Faso, Trinidad and Tobago, Canada, China, and the Czech Republic – would have to converge at a U.S. base with their keys to restart the system and connect everything once again. […]” (full article at http://gizmodo.com/5597964/seven-people-have-been-entrusted-with-the-keys-to-the-internet).

This is the picture of the keys:

Those persons holding the cards are really those with the biggest power in the world. Though the aim is peacefull and reasonable, is quite scaring to have this concentration of power.

Internet for peace Nobel prize 2010 for and against

Lewis Wallace at Wired (http://www.wired.com/underwire/author/lewis_wallace/) writes an article reporting Wired decision to start a campaign for candidating Internet (means each one of us being behind a PC) for Peace Nobel prize 2010 (full article at http://www.wired.com/underwire/2009/11/internet-for-peace-nobel/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29, candidate site at http://www.internetforpeace.it/manifesto.cfm).

I have contrasting feelings on this action.

Why I’m for.

  • Because Internet is THE revolution of the last two centuries, having shortened distances, freed people and developed a common conscience
  • Because Internet is a media of peace and of peace keeping, permitting people to share thoughts, frustrations, dreams, ideas, hopes
  • Because the Nobel Prize for Peace can, finally, promote internet to a sort of new status of overnational media

Why I’m against.

  • Internet is immaterial and, for itself, doesn’t deserve any merit, because are people underlying that make it a “good” or “bad” media
  • Internet is not only peace.  It has inside bad feelings and habits, like everyone of us.
  • Because there are a lot of people more real than internet that deserve an help both as a prize and as money and associated visibility

At the very end, I decided to support the campaign because I hope, like Obama’s prize was this year, that this candidation will be a signal of hope for our world.

This post as a comment also at http://www.wired.com/underwire/2009/11/internet-for-peace-nobel/comment-page-1/#comment-41599

Children identity theft: some considerations

Catherine Forsythe at Lockergnome writes an article talking about identity theft applied to children (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/forsythe/2009/10/26/stealing-your-childs-identity/, Brian J. O’connor article at http://www.detnews.com/article/20091026/BIZ01/910260309/1010/5-ways-to-protect-a-child-s-ID).

I think that children are, as always and unfortunately the perfect targets for evil people.

On the other side, I’m quite sure that, though early access to IT is something desirable, on the other side, this could and should happen always with adult supervision, or, at least with limited activity possibility.

Of course you can manage to tell to young people not to do something, but is not a “bulletproof” solution.

The risk is exposing children to those risks that are not evaluable.  For me, IMHO, my little daughter will have access only through incremental steps of freedom.

This comment as a post also at http://www.lockergnome.com/forsythe/2009/10/26/stealing-your-childs-identity/#comment-40666

Personal fredom and company rights

Dan Schawbel at Stepcase Lifehack writes an article discussing on company rights to block or not access to social sites (and among them to blogs), with special attention on what is about possible use of this type of communication (full article at http://www.lifehack.org/articles/management/does-your-company-support-your-blog.html).

In my opinion is not a problem of freedom nor of possible uses.

In a company, especially those with a strong identity (on brand and communication side), executives could want to have strict control on which messages are given to public and which is the way they are addressed.

For me nothing is taken from personal freedom if access to some (or all)  social sites is blocked or restricted because people take money for doing work, not for using social networks. And at least is a problem of business ethics: even if everything I said is questionable, is a problem of talking about a company internal facts that should not be allowed.

I think that everybody gives as obtained the right of using internet for doing something that is completely or partially unlinked from work: it’s not a right, is an opportunity given by companies that pay the costs.

This post as a comment also at http://www.lifehack.org/articles/management/does-your-company-support-your-blog.html/comment-page-1#comment-342229

Internet advertising regulation

Ryan Singel at Wired writes an article talking about the need of regulations in internet advertising (full article at http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/07/internet-ad-industry-begs-for-regulation/).

I think internet advertising has passed from a wild area to a wilder one.

To make a step forward to an economic, organized and trusted industry, what is needed is a solid and durable regulation.

This post also at http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/07/internet-ad-industry-begs-for-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-31464

Are we relying too heavily on the net?

bradleybradwell at Lockergnome (http://www.lockergnome.com/bradleybradwell/author/bradleybradwell/) writes an article on Internet vulnerability (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/bradleybradwell/2009/07/03/the-internet-isnt-as-powerful-as-we-think-yet).

What follows is my comment.

“We are relying too heavily on the net, assuming that is there, have been and always will be.
Internet is THE revolution of our times, but is becoming (or have always been?) vulnerable not only to attacks, but also to its own evolution. If evolution is not followed by a “consolidation” of the net, we will be surprised how fast our digital and real life will get worse.”

This post as a comment at http://www.lockergnome.com/bradleybradwell/2009/07/03/the-internet-isnt-as-powerful-as-we-think-yet/#comment-446

Jacko’s dead and internet groaning

Jacqui Cheng  (http://arstechnica.com/authors/jacqui-cheng/) at Ars Techinca informs us that ” The passing of pop icon Michael Jackson affected numerous services across the Internet in major ways Thursday evening. As fans and onlookers tried to locate and pass on news, various sites were pushed to their limits, with Google describing the incident as “volcanic.” ” (full article at http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/06/internet-groans-under-weight-of-michael-jackson-traffic.ars).

What follows is my comment:

I think this should teach us a couple of things:
1) That Internet is far from being well dimensioned and always on: a big event can lead to a peak usage not sustainable by the net. This will get from bad to worst if we think of future fast access to internet also for those people, countries and places now uncapable of this and if we all confirm the trend of moving everything to the web. Of course this relies on the fact that growth of net capacity is on a non proportional curve to users (because of costs associated)
2)This is by far a demonstration that we are facing a difficult period, because more emphasis is put on Michael Jackson death than other big problems we have (Iran situation, Afghanistan, a couple of civil wars)”

This post also at http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/06/internet-groans-under-weight-of-michael-jackson-traffic.ars?comments=2&comment_id=587002620041

Books: paper vs electrons

Clive Thompson at Wired writes a good article on the future of books (full article at http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-06/st_thompson#comments?showAllComments=true)

This is my comment

“I think that traditional books will survive a little bit more. That is mainly because, in my opinion, there will be a matter of a geographic technologic and social allignment. Until this gap is filled, and technology will be availble widely at low cost, traditional ways of communication (ingluding books) will survive”.

Of course this recalls my post on future of communication at https://ictheworld.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=54

This post as a comment at http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-06/st_thompson

On information and the internet

Sony Pictures Entertainment CEO, Michael Lynton, said some days ago:

“I’m a guy who doesn’t see anything good having come from the Internet…(The Internet) created this notion that anyone can have whatever they want at any given time. It’s as if the stores on Madison Avenue were open 24 hours a day. They feel entitled. They say, ‘Give it to me now,’ and if you don’t give it to them for free, they’ll steal it.”

At first, seems to me like another famous sentence years ago, where someone (don’t perfectly remember who was), said that there will be room for 4 or 5 computers in the whole world, mainly in universities and military.

The statement that nothing good came out from the internet is so poor, so ridicuolous that doesn’t even deserve to be commented.

I hope that some how Mr. Lynton reminds that information access permitted, for example, to people in remote countries to study, and to start the allignement of knowledge between rich and poor countries or to save lifes or to the whole world progress in the last 20 years.

But what makes me think is the syllogysm he takes out: He states that a certain availability of information entitles people to ask for things and if they don’t get that they wanted, they feel entitled to steal it.

I’m not Sony’s CEO, but I’m a manager and I work for a big corporation.

I know how information, intellectual property and knowledge are crucial to any company.

But just because information (not  only Sony’s pictures or MP3s) is available to many people, this doesn’t entitle anyone to steal it.

Sony is big but isn’t all.

Information over the internet is a benefit and a growth for the whole world, that despite the ideas of Mr. Lynton, needs something a little bit more imprtant than Sony’s copirighted material.

A manager should be also recognized for his wiseness. Maybe this time Mr. Lynton lost a great opportunity to remain in silence.

This article also as a commento on Digg at http://digg.com/tech_news/Sony_Pictures_CEO_Hates_the_Internet_2?FC=dthr

and on Ars technica http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/05/sony-pictures-ceo-internet-needs-regulatory-guardrails.ars?comments=2&comment_id=748003388931

%d bloggers like this: