Ever been on a flight and told you can’t make cell phone calls? Now there’s a push to make that federal law.
The US Department of Transportation are taking steps to officially ban in-flight calls from your cell phone. Months earlier, the FCC proposed easing rules against in-flight calls that has been in place since cell phone use started soaring in the 1990s. Those rules were to stop interference with ground cellular networks. But technology has become far more advanced since then. Then why are the majority of airlines, airline staff, and even passengers against in-flight voice phone use? One reason is distraction. That’s why some have banned them altogether. Others are exploring options, like in-flight phone booths. DOT will pursue such bans on consumer-protection grounds only. That means they’ll pursue the ban only if it means keeping passengers safe and protecting them from being exploited by airlines.
I wouldn’t mind such a ban. Other aspects of transportation are following this route. Amtrak trains have a quiet car that bans cell phone conversations. Take a Greyhound bus and the driver will tell you, “Please keep cell phone conversations to a whisper and to a minimum.” Now I do know emergencies happen; this is the real world. So if something does happen, texting or a short conversation would be suffice. I love the idea of having either a quiet section on a plane or an in-flight phone booth. But nobody wants to be on a flight with 10 or 20 people talking on a cell phone all the time. That would drive anybody crazy. But do you think it’s the government’s place to tell people whether or not to use cell phones?
Russia is enforcing new rules on Internet bloggers. As of today, August 1, all blogs having at least 3,000 readers a day will face stricter government scrutiny, such as ban of explicit language, this seems like Russian Censorship to me.
This new code nicknamed Bill on Bloggers was signed by Russian president Putin in May 2014. Any blogger with 3,000+ visitors a day must register with Russian government watchdog Roskomnadzor. They’ll be under the same restrictions as mainstream journalist. Restrictions include, but don’t limited to, refraining from slander or hate speech. They have to use their own name, no aliases. Any blogger caught breaking these rules will be blocked on Russian territory. Rule breakers are subject to fines equaling $850. I’ve read cases where fines can reach up to $15,000.
This sounds like common sense on paper. One can argue this is similar to the same regulations the Federal Communications Commission has on US media. But Russian Internet companies are already protesting, some are even cooking the numbers to make sure their blogs have a maximum 2,500 readers a day just to avoid the Bill on Bloggers. I can sympathize with these bloggers. They say you can’t use obscene language. Yes, I know about the seven words you can’t say on TV. But what if someone criticizes Putin at all? Is that obscene. Keep in mind Putin was a KGB officer, so in his mind and in his administrators’ minds, criticism is probably offensive. Even in this country, bloggers aren’t subjected to such scrutiny. If they were, then probably a fourth of the blogs we read would be taken down by the government. But this is Russia. Why am I talking about it here in the USA? Do you really think this can’t happen here? So I ask you: is Bill on Bloggers a common sense law or is it a gateway to censorship?
Back on Thursday, July 24, 2014, Microsoft found itself in federal court in New York. They challenged the federal government over forcing tech companies giving them emails in international data centers.
The battle started in December 2013. Federal officials gave Microsoft a search warrant requesting Microsoft turn over emails of a certain person over an illegal drug investigation. The emails they were after were stored in Dublin, Ireland. Microsoft has a data center there and it serves international customers. Microsoft believes a US search warrant shouldn’t be valid beyond the US border. Government officials argue emails in a cloud belong less to you and more to the cloud/business provider. Business records have lower protection than personal records do. And because of this, some government officials say it has authority to get emails worldwide.
This is where my cynicism kicks in. I’m not disputing the law. And I believe in safety and justice. So if this person is in illegal drugs, they need to be brought to justice…in a legal and ethical way. But I wonder if this is just an excuse to spy and snoop. Ever hear of the phrase, ‘You give and inch, you take a mile’? Is this is an excuse for the US government to read emails around the world? I’m not giving Microsoft a medal of honor either. This is a business move. They know 83% of American voters believe cloud info deserve the same protection as paper info. Do you think Microsoft would be fighting this hard if only 38% of American voters Who will win this argument: the US or Microsoft?
OK Cupid’s CEO Christian Rudder admitted to such psychological mind games. He admits this site has removed text from people’s profiles, removed photos, and told people they were compatible matches, when in reality, they were poor matches. These experiments reveled when profiles while removed, people had more in depth conversations. When profile pictures are left, conversations are far less. The reason OK Cupid told people they were 90% compatible when they were really 30% compatible was in hopes they could get together and OK Cupid would get the credit.
Christian Rudder makes no apologies. He defends these practices, pretty much claiming he’s just doing what other websites do all the time. He says, “…if you use the Internet, you’re the subject of hundreds of experiments on any given time, on every site.” Remember when our parents used to tell us, “If everybody else jumped off a bridge…?” You know the rest. So I don’t accept this as an excuse to manipulate, lie and deceive the public. But is he right? This and the Facebook controversy makes me wonder how many more social media sites are using deceptive tactics to play with people’s minds. I’m not saying it’s right. I think this whole operation is morally and ethically wrong. If I went around blatantly lying to people like OK Cupid did, I’d be either fired, arrested, or in some situations, even worse. Who is going to be the next website we hear of do this?
A solar flare hits the Earth, causing massive blackouts. There’s no smartphone, computer, television, or radio to be had. We’re knocked back to the American Civil War era. Sounds like a great TV pilot, right? In real life, it almost happened.
Back on July 23 2012, a solar storm barely missed the Earth’s orbit. If that same storm crossed our path nine days earlier, it would’ve sent all technology worldwide into chaos. According to the National Academy of Sciences, a solar flare like the one back in July 2012 hitting Earth could cost over two trillion dollars in damage, put 130 million people in the dark, and take years to rebuild from. In 1859, a solar flare called the Carrington event did hit the earth. On average, a flare hits us every 150 years. A little overdue, don’t you think?
This is why the solar flare issue needs to be addressed. In the 1850s, the worst that happened what the telegraph system going a muck. Today, our computer systems, technology, Internet, electricity, sewage systems, communication services, fuel supply, even access to food and clean water could all take a hit if one hit us today. I’m not preaching fear by any means, but I do think we need to be aware. And talking about it is the first step to preparation. The second step is building a warning system, kind of like what we have for severe weather today. Why are we hearing about this potentially dangerous flare two years later? A logical step would be create technological products and systems that can better stand up to such a threat. What else can be done to keep us protected from an event of this magnitude?
Microsoft is expected to cut over 18,000 jobs over the next year. Keep in mind? Microsoft only has 125,000 employees. The majority of these cuts will come from Nokia, the phone manufacturer purchased by Microsoft. But the job shaving doesn’t stop with Nokia. Over 5,000 jobs will be cut in other areas of Microsoft. Don’t think Microsoft management is safe: In fact, that’s where many of the jobs will be cut. Mr. Nadella is looking for kind of ‘cultural change’, where future layers of oversight will be cut down to allow for greater accountability and better decision making. The crazy thing is this morning, July 17, 2014, Microsoft’s stock jumped three percent.
This is several times more than the previous record Microsoft let go. That was 5,000 employees in 2009 due to the Great Recession. But I’m weary of this job loss. I will give them credit, at least they’re giving people time to make some decisions and save some money before the ax comes down. I read somewhere where Mr. Nadella wants to do away with tradition and push for innovation. I’m all for innovation, believe me. We live in a changing world, and we need innovation to thrive and survive. But at the risk of this many people? And couldn’t some of these managers he’s letting go actually help the Nokia/Microsoft transition? And I know there has to be casualties in mergers, but this many? What good is this massive layoff going to do, except put more people in the unemployment line?
