Dec 19, 2015 | Smartphone
Ah, the Christmas rush. It’s at the stores. It’s at every party. It’s definitely at the post office. It’s on the roads. Apple pledges to help.
Apple offers free shipping. For all those last minute shoppers (and I know there are many of you), Apple offers free next day delivery for online shoppers. What’s the catch? The online orders have to be made on December 23. And it has to be ordered by 2pm on December 23rd. Plan on visiting your nearest Apple store in the coming days? If you ordered something from any Apple store, in-store pick up orders will be available until two hours before closing on Christmas Eve. Oh, there’s another catch. Free next-day shipping only applies to iPhone models. Everything else, including the iPad, iPod Touch, Mac, iPad, iWatch, and accessories are subject to the two-day shipping standard. This kind of deal you can only get in the USA. But the United Kingdom does have a similar plan. During this busy shopping time, Apple will extend it’s 14-day refund or exchange policy. This goes for any item, whether you bought it online or in an Apple Store, as long as it’s bought between November 1 and December 25, will be available for refunds/exchanges so long as it’s returned by January 8.
I admire Apple’s heart to help out the shopper and enable the Apple addict. But let’s not encourage last minute shoppers anymore than they already are. This deal will cause many people to wait until December 23 to get that Apple gift just so they can take advantage of free shipping. Don’t go there. If you need to buy that Apple gift, go ahead and do it today. Keep in mind they’re only doing this for their smartphones. Also keep in mind anything can go wrong during the shipping process. And whose to say that iPhone is even going to be there by December 23?
Dec 18, 2015 | Security, Uncategorized
Did anybody see the US Republican debate a few nights ago? The main issues were terrorism and national security. Technology encryption is a big part of this debate.
Encryption is a way to communicate online messages so only the sender and recipient can interpret it. This method has been controversial since the 1990s. But this year, with the rise if ISIS and terrorist attacks from Paris, France to San Bernardino, CA, the issue has become a matter of life and death. Where does your favorite candidate stand? Democrat front-runner Hilary Clinton talked loosely about encryption. But earlier this year with Silicon Valley leaders, she called on them to have serious conversations with legislation about encryption. Rival Bernie Sanders hasn’t said much about encryption. In an interview, Sanders expresses fear we’re moving toward a Big Brother society and vows to fight for privacy rights. On the Republican side, front-runner Donald Trump vows to shut out ISIS’s internet connection by any means necessary. Ted Cruz said the USA Freedom Act and giving data collection from the NSA to phone companies could help track terror threats. Marco Rubio wants the Feds and private corporations to share more information to prevent terrorism. The most interesting candidate in this issue is Dr. Ben Carson. His website has high level encryption to process donations, he’s open to surveillance on schools and religious institutions.
Of all these stances on encryption, Dr. Carson’s worries me the most. On one hand, he uses encryption to protect his donors. I’m glad he is. He knows how easy it is for hackers to break into his website. But yet Dr. Carson seems to have little problems with infringing on people’s freedom of religion or education in the name of fighting terrorism. That’s my problem. I know it’s a dangerous, evil world out there. I don’t expect it to get any better in 2016. But we need to fight terrorism without turning into the Big Brother society Bernie Sanders warns about. So far, none of these candidates have a good answer. Do you?
Dec 17, 2015 | Smartphone, Uncategorized
Let’s talk about one of the fastest growing apps in technology today, the WhatsApp. The message app has become so popular and so effective even Facebook bought it out and put WhatsApp in it’s lineup. Apparently, one nation isn’t so impressed.
The Brazilian government orders cable and telecommunication companies to censor WhatsApp for 48 hours. The app was blocked because WhatsApp didn’t respond properly to a criminal case. ?The blocking wasn’t in response to catching a serial killer, drug cartel, terrorist organization or hate group. It was in response to a petitioner seeking an injunction against the company! Brazilian telecom companies have been campaigning for their government to limit free VOIP (Voice Over Internet Services). According to a high ranking criminal court in Sao Paulo, WhatsApp didn’t respond to a court order. Prosecutors requested, and got, a blockage of WhatsApp services for 48 hours. Naturally, the app company expressed great disappointment in this ruling. Keep in mind 93%of Brazilian regular online users access Whats App to help avoid astronomical phone service costs. Some Brazilian phone companies even want this app declared illegal. In response, WhatsApp CEO Jan Koum?accused Brazil of isolating itself from the rest of the world. Nobody knows who the petitioner is.
And it’s not stopping Brazilians from messaging either. Rival company Telegram gained 1.5 million new customers since this fiasco began! I should call this whole situation more than a fiasco. I call it a borderline shootout situation between WhatsApp and Brazilian telecom corporations. And the Brazilian people are caught in the crossfire. They didn’t ask for this. Business wise, I understand telecom companies are losing money. But if they lower their prices to an affordable rate, maybe the people wouldn’t have to turn to WhatsApp. Do they ever think of that? The year 2015 hasn’t been kind to Brazil at all. They’ve dealt with economic recession, environmental ?problems, political unrest, and more. They don’t need this, especially with the Olympics coming their way next year. Don’t you think shutting down a global messenger app is a little extreme to solve this dispute? Why take it out on the people?
Dec 16, 2015 | News, Security
Data protection and privacy rights?are critical issues for both sides of the Atlantic. The European Union passed some of the strongest legislation ever to protect the dignity and integrity of data collection and management.
Such laws already exist in some European nations or sections of these nations. But effective January 2017, these laws that are expected to ensure privacy rights and protect freedoms will be enforced in all 28 EU nations. European Union Parliament passed these laws Tuesday. One law stiffens fines on companies who use and exploit their customerss data without customers’ knowledge or approval. This legislation will enforce the right to be forgotten law. Another law will require corporations to report any security breaches within 72 hours after the breach took place. Children under 16 will need parents’ permission to use social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter or Snapchat. This law is enforced only in nations that don’t have a minimum age limit of 13. This new legislation will apply to any company doing business within the EU, whether they’re based in the EU or not (hint hint, Silicon Valley, USA). Not everybody likes these policies. Google and Facebook has been at odds with the EU for years, which collect data for advertising purposes (as far as we know).
Here is one thing Americans as well as Europeans agree on: Europe is doing more to protect online privacy than the US is. The fact the US doesn’t require corporations to report security breaches immediately is beyond my comprehension. Look at the security branches we’ve had just over the last two years. Then you have the age limit factor. I like all of this legislation, but I’ve got mixed feelings about this one. I understand why they want to put age limits on social media, sort of like we do for R-rated movies or TV-MA rated shows. There’s a lot of adult content on social media (that’s putting it mildly) that should not be watched by children under a certain age. But is it really for the European Union to decide what kids can and can’t download? Shouldn’t parents have priority in that decision?
Dec 15, 2015 | Computer technology
We’ve seen what Facebook and Twitter thought of 2015. But who is the tech person of the year? The answer may surprise you the same way it surprised me.
According to a Yahoo article, Elon Musk is the techie of the year. Musk is an inventor, innovator, and co-founder of PayPal and Tesla Motors. He may not get as much press as he other tech leaders do. But Elon Musk is busy this year. As CEO of Tesla Motors, Musk does his part to make the American auto industry competitive again. This company’s Model S cars sold over 90,000 this year (this is a very expensive car, which makes this number impressive). His Model X car came out this year, with it’s cool self-driving software and futuristic features. As Space X CEO, he raised over a billion dollars to send it’s first vehicle, Deep Space Climate Observatory, into orbit. He’s working to send 400 satellites to help make Internet access available to all. Then there’s Hyperlook. That’s his idea of a super-bullet train that will take you from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 35 minutes, at a speed that tops 760 miles per hour. Musk even said he wants to send people to Mars before ?potential World War 3 starts.
While Elon Musk did awesome things and made awesome proposes in 2015, does he deserve to be techie of the year? What about Mark Zuckerberg, who is also working to get everyone online, and who pledged to give away most of his wealth? What about Satya Nadella, the new Microsoft CEO, who proves nice guys can finish first in this industry? What about Jeff Bezos, who is leading Amazon to the best year of its life? What about Uber CEO Travis Kalanick? His company is starting a technology and transportation revolution. ?And they’re too many other tech leaders to name. Who do you think should be the tech person of the year?
Dec 14, 2015 | Security
Over the last week or so, Twitter has been warning some of a potential attack. This won’t come from your typical cyber thieves or hackers. This could come from international governments.
An investigation is still ongoing. The investigation reveals this impact can only impact IP addresses, email addresses, and possibly phone numbers, especially if phone numbers are linked to their Twitter accounts. Twitter didn’t say which country is behind the threat. But according to tech news website Motherboard, some of those targeted are involved in some sort of online activism. Some are part of the Tor Project. That’s a project that gives free software to help with anonymous communication. But despite these clues, no common factor could be determined. This threat makes Twitter history. This is the first time Twitter sent out notices warning people about a potential hacking threat. The first warning came from user @coldhacka, a self-proclaimed Canadian based privacy/freedom of speech organization. It was revealed one of their leaders is a contractor for Tor Project. A Tor Project security researcher also got the warning. Not only that, this researcher trains rouge journalist who advocate for privacy and other freedom based issues. Could a pattern be forming here?
The first thing that strikes me is which national government is behind the threat? Is it China? Is it Turkey? Is it Russia? Is it even the US? The world is becoming more and more unstable by the minute. They’re a lot of powerful leaders of a lot of powerful nations that don’t want their secrets revealed. I am thankful no critical information: credit card, bank accounts, Social Security numbers aren’t at risk this time. Twitter may not determine the factor, but I think I can. From what I can see, civil liberty groups, privacy rights advocates, and ‘anonymous’ style groups are the ones being warned. These are the kind of online groups world governments are at odds with. Is it any coincidence they’re the ones being targeted?
Dec 13, 2015 | internet
Are you planning a trip for the Christmas season, or New Years Eve, or winter break? Are you booking with Airbnb? Here’s a travel tip you can do nothing about: The whiter you name sounds, the better your Airbnb experience will be.
That’s according to a Harvard Business School study. The study shows Airbnb hosts are 16% less likely to host guest with ‘black sounding names’, like Raheem Jackson, than guest with ‘white sounding names’, like Jane Sullivan. Researchers conducting this study went as far to suggest black guests use pseudonyms. . One researcher even said African-Americans are better booking with mainstream hotels than playing race games with Airbnb. Researchers created over 6,000 fake profiles with names that sound white and black. They sent messages to five major US cities all across the country. The fake guests asked for a weekend in September. It didn’t matter if the hosts were white or black, it seemed the white guests’ requests were more honored. It didn’t take Airbnb long to respond and defend it’s name. In a statement, the company touts itself as one of the most open and diverse companies around today. The statement further said Airbnb recognizes potential discrimination, it will work with anyone to help reduce discrimination.
After Barak Obama was elected US President in November 2008, some said the last battle against American racism had been won. That’s not the case at all! Once again, tech/social media is not immune. I don’t blame Airbnb at all. But it’s time for a serious heart examination for each and every Airbnb host. Airbnb spokespeople tout their diversity. Now it’s time for Airbnb hosts to back it up. I propose before a host signs up to take guests, they should take a questionnaire test. Give them a set of names that sound white, black, Latino, Asian, and Arab. If they favor one race or ethnic group over the other, then that should disqualify them from becoming a host. It’s time this country had a discussion on issues like this, no matter how painful it might be. Where would you start?
Dec 12, 2015 | internet
Yesterday, I covered?Facebook‘s top talked about stories of the year. The number one event was the US presidential election. And they’re running away and cashing in with this one.
There is a website called FriendsWhoLikeTrump.com. It simply shows you which ones of your Facebook friends ‘like’ this outspoken and controversial Republican presidential candidate. This site takes you to a Facebook feature that shows who likes and follows Donald Trump. But you don’t even have to visit the website to find out. All you really have to do is type the phrase ‘my friends who like Donald Trump’ in the top bar of your Facebook?home page. But then again, you can do this for any of the 2016 presidential candidates. For instance, if you want to see who ‘like’ Hilary Clinton, just type ‘my friends who like Hilary Clinton’. Any Carly Fiorina fans in the house? Type in ‘friends who like Carly Fiorina’. You get the idea. But what strikes me is Donald Trump is the only candidate who actually has a website dedicated to finding out those who ‘like’ Trump. To the best of my knowledge, no other candidate has that.
That just shows me how contentious Mr. Trump’s campaign has become and how it’s divided so many people. I can easily see people deleting FB friends simply because they ‘like’ Donald Trump. Have you read some of the things people are saying about him and his supporters? Then again, have you read what Trump supporters have said about his critics and opponents? The hate is real on both sides. I also have a feeling not everybody who ‘like’ Trump really likes Trump. Some may use this as a tool to see what his campaign is up to. I’ll admit, I haven’t lived through that many US presidential elections. But this one is turning into the most bitterly divided one I’ve lived through (hint: I wasn’t born during the really contentious 1968 presidential race). Will FriendsWhoLikeTrump.com play into the division?
Dec 11, 2015 | General
Google Chairman Eric Schmidt put himself in the front lines of one of the most intense Internet debates today. The debate is freedom of speech vs fighting terrorism, hate speech, bullying and other online ills.
In a NY Times op-ed, Schmidt suggested tools like spell-checkers to control tensions. These spell-checkers would keep hate speech and harassment in check. But in the same statement, he suggested stability and freedom of expression go hand in hand. Schmidt didn’t elaborate too much more than this. But Schmidt insists tech platforms like this should only target terrorist groups. Online speech is a hot issue in this election. Hilary Clinton called on Silicon Valley to find a way to stop ISIS‘s online communication. At a South Carolina rally, Donald Trump suggested we close the Internet on some level, and mocked those who would criticize this move in the name of free speech. The rise of terrorist groups like ISIL uses social media for recruitment purposes and to brag about their hideous atrocities. But that’s not all. There have been calls to stop those who use social media as a tool of hatred against others. This is what social media entities like https://computergeeksnow.com/2015/08/28/facebook-turns-a-billion/, Twitter and Google have been wrestling with for years.
On the other side, civil libertarians and free speech advocates have a valid point. Nobody, whether it be governments, social media entities, or hackers, should use terrorism or hatred as an excuse to trample on the civil rights of innocent Americans. On the other hand, something needs to be done to stop ISIS’s demonic propaganda online. The last thing these thugs need is to use the computer as a recruitment tool. So how do tech leaders balance that? How do we as online consumers balance that? Does Google Chairman Eric Schmidt have a point on these spell-checkers? ?Or is Schmidt going too far?
Dec 10, 2015 | Entertainment, News
A few days ago, I wrote a blog of how Twitter evaluated 2015. The tweets of 2015 seemed more culture and celebrity oriented. But this is 2015 according to Facebook. According to Facebook, the past eleven months and ten days were very dark and grim.
Most if not all top 10 events talked about on FB this year have been tragic, disturbing and depressing news stories. On the list include the Charleston, SC shootings and confederate flag debate, Baltimore riots, both terrorist attacks in Paris (remember Charlie Hebdo in back in January), and the global war against ISIS. Other top ten Facebook issues include the devastating earthquake in Nepal, debt crisis and riots in Greece, and Syrian war and refugee crisis. The other two issues were somewhat lighter, but divided us as a nation. The first was the Supreme Court’s legalization of same-sex marriage in all 50 states. The top issue of Facebook talk was the US presidential election. While the US presidential election isn’t a catastrophe (well, depending on who you ask), but it’s already divided so many Americans. As contentious as the election is already, this issue is going to divide a lot more Americans in 2016 too.
Was 2015 that grim of a year? In a sense, yes. The top ten list didn’t include blizzards in Boston, droughts in California, a measles outbreak, a German pilot crashing his own plane with 150 passengers on board, and hundreds were trampled to death in a Mecca stampede. But there were some light and even inspiring events that happened in 2015. We had a heck of a Super Bowl. Pope Francis visited the United States. The US and Cuba thawed it’s 56-year-old icy relationship. So lots of good stuff happened. In previous years, events like the Super Bowl, Olympics, World Cup, even the Harlem shake dance craze (that reminds me, the whip nae nae was extremely popular in 2015) made the top ten. So what is it about this year? Was this past year darker than the others? Or is our mood just darker?
