Sep 27, 2013 | General, internet
Some reports this week about Internet use got me thinking which nations have low online access? I’m counting down this list based on low online use percentage. These are the countries I think we need to take notice of.
10. China: [43.2% have Internet access, 102nd in the world] This stat is due more to censorship than anything else. But the Shanghai business district is opening up, and hopefully, the rest of China will too.
9. Mexico: [38.4% have Internet access, 114th in the world] The US and Canada’s online access rate is in the 80s. What can be done to fix this imbalance?
8. Nigeria [32.9% have Internet access, 128th in the world] They have the second highest online access rate in all of Africa; that’s whats so startling! But if you see an Ebay offer from Nigeria, run!
7. Iran [26% have Internet access, 133rd in the world] Censorship is huge in this nation. But that didn’t stop millions from using social media to protest elections!
6. Syria [24.3% have Internet access, 139th in the world] Obviously this nation has far more issues to worry about than the Internet. But if more people had access to it, I think it would be a powerful way for the Syrian people to tell their own story during this horrible war.
5 India [12.6% have Internet access 164th in the world] It’s one of the fastest growing and most populous nations in the world. Many can’t get wait to get their hands on the latest gadgets. This nation needs to step up it’s online game if it’s going to compete in the global market.
4-3 Iraq and Afghanistan [7.1% and 5.5% have Internet access 179th and 185th in the world] After 12 years of war in these nations, Internet access would be a great symbol of rebuilding. It would also prove a powerful outlet to show the world.
2. East Timor [0.9% have Internet access 210th in the world] There are two countries where online access is less than one percent. This tiny nation in Southeast Asia is one of them.
1. Eritrea [0.8% have Internet access 211th in the world] This nation is East Africa’s horn scored the lowest in media freedoms in the world. In fact, they’ve had no private or free owned media since 2001, a record that rivals North Korea’s.
There’s my list. What other nations are…ahem…worthy of being up here?
Sep 26, 2013 | General, internet
In the 2010s, Americans who use the Internet are in the 80s percentile range. In 2000, it was 46%, and in 2005, it was 68%. But this number also means as of 2013, around 38 million Americans are without Internet access. Let’s examine the reasons.
Economics have a? role to play. Of those surveyed who don’t use the Internet, 19% say that can’t afford a computer neither/nor an Internet provider service. Some say that lack online service in their local area. But let’s look at the other 66%. This group will tell you it’s simply by choice. This group says it’s not relative to them and simply want no part of it. They also say they’re so concerned with issues from spam to hackers to privacy rights, that they feel safer if they don’t log on at all. The majority of non-Internet users are over 65. Only 8% of off-line Americans say they even have the desire to get back on.
There’s quite a few observations here. First, if? people don’t want to use the Internet for various reasons, more power to them. Who are we to tell them how to conduct their lives? But my concern is the minority who can’t afford it or have access to it. In 2013 America, that has to change. Thankfully, there are public libraries virtually in every county in the US that will let you use computers for free. All you need is to get their local library card. Yes, there are time limits and censor filters for naughty websites, but at lest those who want to use the Web can do so. But there are some who can’t even get to their local library. What about people living in extremely rural areas? How do those who want to get online do so? There is a movement among some online movers and shakers to make sure everyone has access to being online. In this day and age, should online access be a right to all Americans?
Sep 18, 2013 | Entertainment, General, internet
Okay, I’d better clarify that! Since it’s inception in late 2005, You Tube has released countless videos. They now average billions of hours of videos every month. Now, you no longer have to be online to get this phenomenon.
Effective next month, you can save clips on your portable device for 2 days, and you can watch them when you’re offline. Advertisers will still tout their products, which I’m sure is good news for them. You Tube will be still be free for the viewer, which is good news for me and you. For You Tube video producers, they can option out of the offline option. Why would they want to?
No, I don’t see a downside to this at all. You may say, “Everyplace has wi-fi or online access these days.” Not really. Imagine being in a car with three bad kids, and offline You Tube is the only thing calming them down. I know places, like my gym, that doesn’t have online access. Don’t get me started on airplanes, where in many cases, in-flight entertainment is now a fond memory. Offline You Tube will be a true plus over a crying baby or arguing couple or a disgruntle customer complaining to a flight attendant about everything!? This is good for advertisers too. This frees up more space for more companies to hack more products. I know these commercials can get annoying at times. But I’d rather watch the same You Tube commercial 10 times a day then to pay for You Tube out my own pocket! What do you think about offline You Tube?
Sep 10, 2013 | Entertainment, General
Between 1983 and 1993, John Sculley was at Apple serving as CEO. During his reign, Apple went from an $800 million franchise to an $8 billion franchise. His reign was famous for something else too: the termination of it’s own founder, Steve Jobs.
By 1985, Apple 3, Apple 2, and Lisa had either failed or was on life support. Now, everything depended on Macintosh, which needed funding in a hurry. You see, what’s hails today as one of the greatest computers ever was then little more than an object of ridicule. Jobs proposed the Macintosh price be dropped and most of the advertising be shifted from Apple 2 to Mac. Sculley opposed this move, and it went to the board. The board sided with Sculley. Jobs was removed as head on the Mac division, and the rest is history.
Sculley says Jobs wasn’t a good executive back then. I think Sculley’s background plays a part in this. During the interview last week, he blamed the board. But Sculley admits he came from a background where he had to be accountable to stockholders and other colleagues. Jobs was more of a revolutionary, convinced the Mac was going to change the world. Eventually, these two philosophies are going to clash, and they did here back in ’85. Logically, if I was in that boardroom, I would have sided with Sculley. I would’ve been thinking about the bottom line, and the bottom line was we need something to happen now, not in the future.? But this is why I have so much respect for Jobs. He stuck to his guns and knew he had a winner, and he was willing to risk it all. And eventually, he got the last laugh. Of course, this experience helped him become a better executive. I think we can all learn a lesson from one of most infamous showdowns in tech history. If you’re passionate enough about something, stick with it. You may fail, you may be ridiculed, and it may cost you, but keep persevering. Eventually, you too will have the last hurray. Can you imagine what life would be like today if Jobs gave in or gave up back in 1985?
Sep 8, 2013 | General, networking
President Barak Obama once said, “We’ve got to have the brightest minds to help solve our biggest challenges.” San Francisco, California attempts to live out that call.
This city is launching the Entrepreneurship-in-Residence program from mid-October to mid-February. People who own technological start-ups or small businesses who can contribute in making their community a better place can still apply. During this four month program, participants can get mentorship and connections from San Francisco government and business leaders. They can attend trainings on working with the government on issues like security and data standards. You can get on a platform and offer your services to local governments. Big time tech companies like Yahoo and Nokia are taking part. This could be the jackpot for many struggling startups and small businesses. They estimate there is up to $142 billion dollars worth of opportunity. The application process is still open. If successful this program will go to Los Angeles next.
You know, I hope this program is successful. Stats don’t lie: some polls have government approval rates as low as 13 percent. People don’t have a high opinion of big business either. If theses two entities can team up and help smaller business prosper and help their neighborhoods prosper, I think people will see them in a different light. San Francisco is a great start, with Silicon Valley being nearby. In the next several years I hope every major city in America has this kind of program. Think about it: it this is successful nationwide, jobs can be created, community relations can be strengthened, and business can prosper. Wouldn’t that solve a lot of city problems?
Aug 27, 2013 | General, networking
Detroit, once an American jewel of cars and music, has declared bankruptcy and is now a shell of it’s former self. In Nov. 2011, so did Jefferson County/Birmingham, Alabama. According to some articles and experts, Chicago, San Diego, and Silicon Valley’s own San Jose, CA are on the chopping block. One tech pioneer is trying to do something about it.
Here comes Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter and CEO of Square, a service that helps merchants take debit and credit card?payments over smartphones. Starting Aug 29, he’ll be hosting a forum with merchants and small business owners in St. Louim s. St. Louis is Dorsey’s home town and a city that’s struggling on many sides. In the near future, Dorsey plans to host forums in Bronx NY, New Orleans, and Detroit, among other cities.?Focusing on cities that are facing?hard times, he wants to build dialogue and community.?He’s focusing on the small business for two reasons.?One, people actually want to buy locally and keep their dollars in their communities. Two, he recognizes small businesses are the social backbone of?a town, even?major cities. Merchants?can even?use these forums to share their works, sort of like a show and tell for?small business owners. ?Dorsey admit this may not solve all problems, but at least dialogue and plans and a re-building progress can be started.
And I have to agree with him. Think about it: for the longest time, meeting places have always been the local tavern, pizza parlor, salon/barber shop, pool hall, bowling alley, skating ring, coffee shop, etc. Sure, with today’s social media, we can keep virtual contact with anyone anywhere, and that’s a great way to build community. But there comes a time when we all want human contact, and these small businesses allow us that. Plus, I’ve notice a movement going on. I think people are tired of globalization being shoved down their throats. And since so many jobs have been shipped overseas, there’s a hunger for local businesses and an insistence on keeping dollars in the community. Thus, jobs are created, because people need to run and manage these businesses and services. So I say hats off to Jack Dorsey. If these forums come to your town, would you attend?
