When we found out the National Security Advisory was checking in on our smartphones and computers, without search warrants, our knowledge or our approval, many believed the NSA and computer and phone companies were in cahoots with each other. As we later learned, that wasn’t often the case. Now, another tech giant is taking on the issue.
Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg tackled the issue at a Tech Crunch conference. He insists he didn’t give the government access to servers. He claimed the NSA “…blew it on communicating the balance of what they were going for with this.” Facebook and Yahoo are filing a suit asking FISA’s blessing to publish more data on the government’s request for people’s information. But it doesn’t stop there. Next week, Zuckerberg goes to Washington and meet with Congress. Right to privacy issues and NSA privacy leaks are expected to be hot topics.
Nonetheless, I do find it suspect that Zuckerberg is only meeting with top Republicans, including John Boehner. Forgive my cynicism, but if he wanted to tackle the surveillance issue, shouldn’t he be meeting with both sides of the isle? Then I read about his other political contributions, and that makes me a little more suspect. I’m not suspect about his intentions about the NSA. I’m sure he’s doing this to protect his best interest and his users. He knows much of the public is sick and tired of this kind of spying. What if people stop using Facebook because of these NSA revelations? He can’t have that, can he? So business wise, I believe he’s sincere about taking on gov’t surveillance. But the cynic part comes in when I read about how he’s only meeting with top people from one party. Add that into the thousands he’s contributed to other politicians, and the millions Facebook has given to lobbyists. So what are Zuckerberg’s intentions: are they for us or for his own social/political intentions?
Microsoft has always wanted go get into the smartphone game. Their sales have been chugging along. Today, I wake up to the shocking news Microsoft purchased Nokia.
For an astronomical 7.17 billion dollars, Microsoft bought Nokia’s devices, services, licenses and mapping services. So now, Microsoft has the world’s biggest cell phone maker in it’s arsenal. Add this to the Skype, which Microsoft purchased in 2011. Outgoing CEO Steve Ballmer claims it’s, “A bold step into the future.” At the heart of this acquisition is Asha, a Nokia brand. This gives Microsoft more room and resources for the Windows phone, and better access to the millions of Asha users, particularly in rising nations like China, India, Russia and Brazil. Other issues given for this deal include profit acceleration, competition with Google and Apple and to give a better experience for Windows phone users.
But is this a good idea? Nokia has been struggling for years. In 2013, Nokia expects to lose over 10,000 jobs. In July, they closed a major plant in their home in Finland. So they’re drowning and in need of a rope. Microsoft is there to pull them in. At least that’s the way it appears. Microsoft?wants to compete in the phone business, so this seems like a good fit. But many experts aren’t excited about this deal for several reasons. My problem is that with this purchase, Skype a couple of years ago, and the power Microsoft has already, I’m more worried about less competition and a monopoly being created. I should be thankful that there’s Apple and Android to stop that from happening. But what about the smaller companies that want to get their feet wet? Think about how much power the world’s largest computer company gets now that they have the world’s largest phone maker. Is this too much power for one company to have?
Yesterday, the New York Times’ website was attacked. ?A group named Syrian Electronic Army, sympathizers of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, claimed responsibility.
The New York Times site went down around 3pm yesterday, and went down again around 6pm Eastern time. This isn’t the first time the Syrian Electronic Army struck. On Aug 15, they struck The Washington Post. Even today, the NYT started less than 100%. Some subscribers can access the site; other cannot. As of 8am, the Times tweeted people can go to news.nytco.com to get their news. I haven’t used this site, so I can’t verify that. But by 10am, the Syrian Electronic Army tweeted they were going to deliver an anti-war statement,?but?that their website was down.?They claimed it was worth it in the name of world peace.
Over the weekend, China’s Internet was attacked. Not only was it attacked, but government officials say it was the biggest denial-of-service hack in that nation’s history.
The only silver lightning is the timing the attack happened. It took place between 2am and 4am Sunday morning. The attack was aimed at a registry that allows ‘.cn’ sites. That’s kind of what ‘.com’ is to us in the US.?Thanks to?good?back up programs,?the outage only hit parts of websites for some users. In layman’s terms, it could have been a lot worse. By Monday morning, things online seemed to have gotten back to normal. According to Cloud Fare CEO Matthew Prince, there was a 32% drop in Chinese traffic and?domain use during this attack. Many experts believe the Chinese government have the power to carry out attacks, the believe the nation has little in defense against them.
It’s scary to believe one person can bring down much of a nation’s Web juice. It’s even scarier that a gov’t is good at starting attacks, but not very good at defending their own people against them. But I guess it could have been worse. But will it be next time? China is one of the fastest growing and most important economies in the world. If that can happen to them, what next? Are we in America just as venerable?
In much of the country, especially in my circles, the Internet is something taken for granted these days. Then I saw this map. There are nations in which less than 10% of people have Internet access. Even in rising economies like India and China, the number is lower than I thought. There are people and companies trying to change that.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerburg is leading the charge to make the Internet accessible to those that don’t have it. Samsung, Nokia and Qualcomm are among those helping with this cause. Their tool is called Internet.org. They want to cut the cost of delivering Internet services, through computer or smartphone. They also want to make apps run more efficiently and improve networks to transport data better with less battery power. In one Interview, Zuckerberg claims, “The Internet is such an important thing for driving humanity forward, but it?s not going to build itself.”
On one hand, I applaud these efforts. These days, everyone around the world should have the right to have Internet access. In 2013, the Internet shouldn’t be a privilege, but a right. In many cases, it’s not a luxury, but a necessity. And people should have that choice and opportunity to use online services. But then the cynic in me kick in. There’s a part of me that wonders if this a tool to make more money for these companies. They know developed nations can only give them so much business, and here is a new source of revenue. So why is Zuckerberg and this Internet.org coalition doing this? Is it humanitarian, business, or a bit of both?
While the Internet and social media have been the source of many blessings, it can be the source of many curses, from cyber bullying to the NSA scandals. Now there’s another evil lurking.
It’s called sextortion. Hackers break into unsuspecting people’s computers and smartphones. Then they see and take pictures of all your intimate moments. Then they come and make demands…do what we want and give us what we want or we’ll post the pictures. Don’t think it can happen? Just ask Miss Teen USA Cassidy Wolf. Someone had slipped technology called RAT, Remote Administration Tool, and snapped pictures of her in her room. According to Ms. Wolf, the light wasn’t even on and she didn’t even know she was being filmed. The hacker threated to expose them if she didn’t give into his demands. The last time I checked, the FBI identified a suspect.
Unfortunately, Cassidy Wolf’s ordeal isn’t unique. Celebrities from Mila Kunis to Scarlett Johansson have been victimized. But you don’t have to be a celebrity to fall prey to this sickness. A Glendale, CA man got 350 women to show him naked pictures. Now what are we going to do about it? Cassidy Wolf is taking bold steps to address sextortion as part of her platform during her Miss Teen USA reign. She’s also educating other teens about these dangers. We can keep the sextortion story in the media and in the public eye. They more we do this the more we demand computer makers?and ?security companies to build better things to combat this gross invasion. We can also stay on our lawmakers and political leaders to pass laws against sextortion. There are people serving 10 year prison sentences for this perpetration. ?And we need to educate, educate and educate! The hackers and criminals are getting smarter. Shouldn’t we?
