Sponsoer by :

Saturday, August 13, 2011

SF cell shutdown: Safety issue, or hint of Orwell? (AP) : Technet

Sponsored

SF cell shutdown: Safety issue, or hint of Orwell? (AP) : Technet

SF cell shutdown: Safety issue, or hint of Orwell? (AP)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 07:13 PM PDT

By TERRY COLLINS, Associated Press Terry Collins, Associated Press – 1 hr 48 mins ago

SAN FRANCISCO – An illegal, Orwellian violation of free-speech rights? Or just a smart tactic to protect train passengers from rowdy would-be demonstrators during a busy evening commute?

The question resonated Saturday in San Francisco and beyond as details emerged of Bay Area Rapid Transit officials' decision to cut off underground cellphone service for a few hours at several stations Thursday. Commuters at stations from downtown to near the city's main airport were affected as BART officials sought to tactically thwart a planned protest over the recent fatal shooting of a 45-year-old man by transit police.

Two days later, the move had civil rights and legal experts questioning the agency's move, and drew backlash from one transit board member who was taken aback by the decision.

"I'm just shocked that they didn't think about the implications of this. We really don't have the right to be this type of censor," said Lynette Sweet, who serves on BART's board of directors. "In my opinion, we've let the actions of a few people affect everybody. And that's not fair."

Similar questions of censorship have arisen in recent days as Britain's government put the idea of curbing social media services on the table in response to several nights of widespread looting and violence in London and other English cities. Police claim that young criminals used Twitter and Blackberry instant messages to coordinate looting sprees in riots.

Prime Minister David Cameron said that the government, spy agencies and the communications industry are looking at whether there should be limits on the use of social media sites like Twitter and Facebook or services like BlackBerry Messenger to spread disorder. The suggestions have met with outrage — with some critics comparing Cameron to the despots ousted during the Arab Spring.

In the San Francisco instance, Sweet said BART board members were told by the agency of its decision during the closed portion of its meeting Thursday afternoon, less than three hours before the protest was scheduled to start.

"It was almost like an afterthought," Sweet told The Associated Press. "This is a land of free speech and for us to think we can do that shows we've grown well beyond the business of what we're supposed to be doing and that's providing transportation. Not censorship."

But there are nuances to consider, including under what conditions, if any, an agency like BART can act to deny the public access to a form of communication — and essentially decide that a perceived threat to public safety trumps free speech.

These situations are largely new ones, of course. A couple of decades ago, during the fax-machine and pay-phone era, the notion of people organizing mass gatherings in real time on wireless devices would have been fantasy.

BART Deputy Police Chief Benson Fairow said the issue boiled down to the public's well-being.

"It wasn't a decision made lightly. This wasn't about free speech. It was about safety," Fairow told KTVU-TV on Friday.

BART spokesman Jim Allison maintained that the cellphone disruptions were legal as the agency owns the property and infrastructure. He added while they didn't need the permission of cellphone carriers to temporarily cut service, they notified them as a courtesy.

The decision was made after agency officials saw details about the protest on an organizer's website. He said the agency had extra staff and officers aboard trains during that time for anybody who wanted to report an emergency, as well as courtesy phones on station platforms.

"I think the entire argument is that some people think it created an unsafe situation is faulty logic," Allison said. "BART had operated for 35 years without cellphone service and no one ever suggested back then that a lack of it made it difficult to report emergencies and we had the same infrastructure in place."

But as in London, BART's tactic drew immediate comparisons to authoritarianism, including acts by the former president of Egypt to squelch protests demanding an end to his rule. Authorities there cut Internet and cellphone services in the country for days earlier this year. He left office shortly thereafter.

"BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak," the Electronic Frontier Foundation said on its website. Echoing that comparison, vigorous weekend discussion on Twitter was labeled with the hashtag "muBARTek."

Aaron Caplan, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who specializes in free-speech issues, was equally critical, saying BART clearly violated the rights of demonstrators and other passengers.

"We can arrest and prosecute people for the crimes they commit," he said. "You are not allowed to shut down people's cellphones and prevent them from speaking because you think they might commit a crime in the future."

Michael Risher, the American Civil Liberty Union's Northern California staff attorney, echoed the sentiment in a blog: "The government shouldn't be in the business of cutting off the free flow of information. Shutting down access to mobile phones is the wrong response to political protests, whether it's halfway around the world or right here in San Francisco."

On Saturday at the station where cell phone service was disrupted, passenger Phil Eager, 44, shared the opinion that BART's approach seemed extreme.

"It struck me as pretty strange and kind of extreme," said Eager, a San Francisco attorney. "It's not a First Amendment debate, but rather a civil liberties issue."

Eager said many of his friends riding BART on Thursday were upset with the agency's actions, some even calling it a "police state."

Mark Malmberg, 58, of Orinda, Calif., believes that BART could've used a different approach instead of shutting down cellphone usage.

"Even though it sounds like they wanted to avoid a mob gathering, you can't stop people from expressing themselves," Malmberg said. "I hope those who protest can do so in a civil manner."

The ACLU already has a scheduled meeting with BART's police chief on Monday about other issues and Thursday's incident will added be to the agenda, spokeswoman Rebecca Farmer said.

But others said that while the phone shutdown was worth examining, it may not have impinged on First Amendment rights. Gene Policinski, executive director of the First Amendment Center, a nonprofit educational organization, said freedom of expression can be limited in very narrow circumstances if there is an immediate threat to public safety.

"An agency like BART has to be held to a very high standard," he said. "First of all, it has to be an immediate threat, not just the mere supposition that there might be one. And I think the response has to be what a court would consider reasonable, so it has to be the minimum amount of restraint on free expression."

He said if BART's actions are challenged, a court may look more favorably on what it did if expression was limited on a narrow basis for a specific area and time frame, instead of "just indiscriminately closing down cellphone service throughout the system or for a broad area."

University of Michigan law professor Len Niehoff, who specializes in First Amendment and media law issues, found the BART actions troublesome for a few reasons.

He said the First Amendment generally doesn't allow the government to restrict free speech because somebody might do something illegal or to prohibit conversations based on their subject matter. He said the BART actions have been portrayed as an effort to prevent a protest that would have violated the law, but there was no guarantee that would have happened.

"What it really did is it prevented people from talking, discussing ... and mobilizing in any form, peaceful or unpeaceful, lawful or unlawful," he said. "That is, constitutionally, very problematic."

The government does have the right to break up a demonstration if it forms in an area where protests are prohibited and poses a risk to public safety, Niehoff said. But it should not prohibit free speech to prevent the possibility of a protest happening.

"The idea that we're going to keep people from talking about what they might or might not do, based on the idea that they might all agree to violate the law, is positively Orwellian," he said.

___

Associated Press reporters Tom Murphy in Indianapolis; Gene Johnson in Seattle; Jonathan Cooper in Portland, Ore.; and Cassandra Vinograd and David Stringer in London contributed.

Rapper could face charges tied to flash mob calls (AP)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 03:02 PM PDT

By NOAKI SCHWARTZ, Associated Press Noaki Schwartz, Associated Press – Sat Aug 13, 6:02 pm ET

LOS ANGELES – A rapper could face criminal charges after a tweet from his account incited a telephone flash mob that overwhelmed the emergency phone system at one of busiest stations of the Los Angeles County sheriff's department, the agency said Saturday.

The sheriff's department alleges The Game tweeted the Compton station's phone number Friday and told his 580,000 followers to call the number if they wanted an internship.

Phones at the southeast Los Angeles County station started ringing at 5:23 p.m. Friday, and the lines were jammed by hundreds of calls for more than two hours, prompting authorities to bring in additional help. Many callers hung up as soon as someone answered, while others asked deputies about a music internship.

During that time people with legitimate issues that included a missing person, spousal abuse and two robberies were also trying to call in, department spokesman Steve Whitmore said.

Sheriff's Capt. Mike Parker said that when authorities finally figured out what had happened, he sent two tweets to the rapper asking him to take down the number. Instead, Parker said, The Game posted that his account had been hacked and also tweeted that it was an accident.

"Yall can track a tweet down but cant solve murders!" the tweet said. "Dat was an accident but maybe now yall can actually do yall job !!!!"

A call and email to The Game's publicist, Greg Miller at Big Hassle Media, was not immediately returned.

The rapper finally took down the number around 11 p.m. Friday after a third request from Parker, who took particular issue with the accusation that deputies are not doing their job.

"Under the LA county sheriffs we've reduce homicides in Compton by over 50 percent in recent years and crime is down in Compton, but it's particularly helpful when the public can contact us," Parker said Saturday in a phone interview with The Associated Press. "This incident was the social media equivalent of going into a crowded movie theater and shouting 'Fire!'"

Investigators will document what happened, how many calls flooded the station, the rapper's tweets and other information, and will turn it over to the district attorney's office next week, Parker said. The rapper could face charges of maliciously disrupting or impeding communications over a public safety radio frequency, obstruction of justice or other charges related to delaying a peace officer from doing their job.

"Public safety was absolutely compromised," Parker said. "We were delayed in responding to calls."

The Game is a California-based rapper whose real name is Charles Louboutin, the sheriff's office said in a release.

His 2005 debut album, "The Documentary," entered the charts at the top and sold 586,000 units in the first week, according to his website. The rapper, who grew up in Compton, has collaborated with famed rappers including Dr. Dre, Kanye West and 50 Cent.

Tecca TV: TechLife on iPad ninjas, the world’s tallest tower, how we’re all aliens, and more (Yahoo! News)

Posted: 12 Aug 2011 05:42 PM PDT

Jonathan's Card: Starbucks Shuts Down Social Experiment Over Fraud Concerns (Mashable)

Posted: 12 Aug 2011 05:04 PM PDT

Jennifer Van Grove Jennifer Van Grove – Fri Aug 12, 8:04 pm ET

Jonathan Stark's community-giving Starbucks Card is no more. At 7 p.m. PT Friday, Starbucks reluctantly pulled the plug on Stark's pay-it-forward social experiment following allegations of fraud or misuse. Starbucks made the decision to shut down the communal Jonathan's Card, already in violation of Starbucks Card program terms, after it came to light that funds were being misappropriated.

[More from Mashable: Jonathan's Card: Is The Starbucks Social Experiment Over?]

Adam Brotman, vice president of digital ventures at Starbucks, phoned Stark earlier Friday evening to inform him that the card would be deactivated. Starbucks, he says, was rooting for the experiment from the sidelines, even though the company's terms do not permit the use of shared registered cards.

"I'm sad about it, first and foremost, because we were legitimately cheering on this experiment," Brotman says.

[More from Mashable: HOW TO: Personalize Your Marketing With Social Data]

Friday morning, entrepreneur Sam Odio's "How to use Jonathan's card to buy yourself an iPad" blog post lit the web on the fire. Some saw the card exploit as an evolution of the experiment; others saw it as theft. Odio even later offered to return the funds. Once the exploit was public, however, Starbucks felt compelled to deactivate the card.

Stark launched Jonathan's Card on July 14 as a social adaption of the "take a penny, leave a penny" concept. Hundreds of people donated several thousand dollars to the communal coffee project before it was shut down.

The Jonathan's Card website has been updated with the following message: "We believe this is the start to a bigger more glowing picture. In the last 5 days or so, we've received hundreds of stories of people doing small things to brighten a stranger's day: Paying for the next car at the drive through. Sharing a pick me up with someone who has had a rough time. Charging up a phone card and sharing it with strangers at the airport ... So, tonight we lose our barcode. But of course, we never needed it in the first place."

The @jonathanscard Twitter account, which was previously updating followers with the card's balance, observed its end with this final tweet: "The next chapter begins jonathanstark.com/card."

This story originally published on Mashable here.

Missouri law limiting teacher-student online contact draws ire (Reuters)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 08:29 AM PDT

Why promoting ChromeBooks is killing Android tablets (Digital Trends)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 04:45 AM PDT

Rob Enderle Rob Enderle – Sat Aug 13, 7:45 am ET

samsung-series-5-chromebook

I'm traveling to Boston this week, and flying my favorite airline: Virgin America. One of the perks on the flight this week is that Google is loaning out ChromeBooks to anyone who wants them for free, including free Wi-Fi. The funny thing is that despite multiple announcements, few people took them up on this free offer. As I look around the plane (where I'm writing this), a number of folks are on laptops and iPads, so it isn't as if folks didn't want to be online. Given that Android tablets haven't been doing all that well either, I think this helps illustrate a fundamental weakness in Google. Even though the company is clearly made up of people, and makes its money from advertising, Google doesn't seem to understand how to create excitement. Yet, Google+ had plenty of excitement, demonstrating that Google is capable of it. Let's explore why Google is at the root of the demand issues with Android Tablets, and why ChromeBooks are these tablets' worst enemy.

The advantage of focus

Watch Apple. The company will focus on a new product nearly exclusively until it succeeds. It waited until the iPod started to slow before bringing out the iPhone, and then largely shifted marketing to that new platform. It didn't start the iPad until the iPhone was clearly a success. The firm is methodical about driving all the way to the success of one product before moving to another.

This is the advantage of focus. Apple TV didn't get that same focus, and despite actually being the best set-top box (besides those from cable companies), it hasn't done that well. This suggests that it isn't some magic related to Apple products, but the fact that Apple drives success into its offerings, and doesn't get distracted until that drive has hit Apple's expectations.

Google tosses and prays

Google, by contrast, seems to have a new initiative every few months. Most of these (Wave, etc.) seem to fail from lack of interest. Google doesn't drive to success, and appears to have the attention span of a small child. Android tablets aren't successful yet, but Google has already started to push ChromeBooks. Arguably, this just confuses buyers. If you think about it, even though they run on different software, the ChromeBook and Android Tablet overlap in price and their connectivity advantages. But having two very different software platforms both splits developers and confuses the buyer, reducing demand and benefitting Apple, which looks simple by comparison. If you add a keyboard to an iPad, you effectively get the benefits of an Android Tablet and a Chromebook in one product, and you only have to live in one interface. Developers have an easy choice.

samsung-series-5-chromebook-screen

If Google had been giving out Android tablets on the plane, rather than ChromeBooks, more passengers likely would have taken them. Android tablets dovetail with the iPad's success, while the ChromeBooks look too much like the early failed netbook effort. People aren't taking the Google offer because, even for free, it isn't worth it for them. They just don't see the value because Google hasn't first created any demand for a new product, and what demand there is focused on the iPad.

Google's problem

The irony here is that Steve Jobs actually mentored the Google founders, who just seemed to steal Apple's product ideas but clearly didn't grasp the more important information: how to build and sustain demand for new technology products. Without that skill, they become their own worst enemy, because they have a tendency to pull demand from the very products they should be aggressively trying to complete and promote.

Until Google figures that out, the company will likely remain its own worst enemy. This is why seeding ChromeBooks is killing Android Tablets.

Guest contributor Rob Enderle is the founder and principal analyst for the Enderle Group, and one of the most frequently quoted tech pundits in the world. Opinion pieces denote the opinions of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of Digital Trends.

Anonymous Facebook Shutdown vs. Governmental Shutdown of Facebook (ContributorNetwork)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 12:14 PM PDT

UCLA Engineers develop smartphone LCDs that harvest light for power (Digital Trends)

Posted: 12 Aug 2011 09:40 PM PDT

Jeff Hughes Jeff Hughes – Sat Aug 13, 12:40 am ET

UCLA polarizerTired of your smartphone or laptop dying on you? UCLA engineers have figured out a way to use LCD screens to power electronic devices by harvesting energy from surrounding light sources.

Liquid crystal displays, or LCDs, can be found in much of today's electronics such as TVs, smartphones, computers and more. These displays work using two polarized sheets sandwiching crystal molecules between them which act act as light valves. The combination allows a certain amount of the backlight to escape which creates images on the screen. The problem is that LCDs can suck a lot of power from devices.

Through a research gift to UCLA from Intel and the Office of Naval Research, engineers at the UCLA Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science found they could increase energy efficiency by equipping devices' LCD screens with photovoltaic polarizers that converted electricity from ambient light, sunlight and even the LCD's own backlight. The engineering team calls it a polarizing organic photovoltaic.

"I believe this is a game-changer invention to improve the efficiency of LCD displays," said Yang Yang, professor of materials science at UCLA and principal investigator behind the research. "These polarizers can also be used to harvest indoor or outdoor light. So next time you are on the beach, you could charge your iPhone via sunlight."

According to the researchers the current polarized sheets used in LCDs are not efficient enough. Backlights can consume huge portions of a devices power, something like 80 to 90 percent, and as much as 75 percent of that light expelled energy is lost due to the polarizers. The polarizing organic photovaltaic cell aims to catch that energy and turn it back into electricity, though the conversion efficiency of the new polarizers wasn't stated.

Via UCLA newsroom

 

OfficeTime shows how sometimes, apps do it better (Appolicious)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 11:00 AM PDT

SteelSeries World of Warcraft legendary gaming mouse (Digital Trends)

Posted: 13 Aug 2011 06:14 PM PDT

Amir Iliaifar Amir Iliaifar – 2 hrs 47 mins ago

SteelSeries World of Warcraft legendary gaming mouse front


The SteelSeries World of Warcraft MMO Gaming Mouse: Legendary Edition is the ultimate weapon during your red bull drinking, hot pocket snacking, just-one-more-level-until-I-go-to-bed, adventure in Azeroth. The ultimate in geek chic, the Legendary edition features 11 programmable buttons, and an ergonomic design for long sessions of dungeon crawling or raiding. Further adding to the customization options , the SteelSeries allows you to configure your settings in game, script your macros, add button assignments, and adjust the illumination option that enables you change the amount of pulse and light the mouse emits. Finally, the SteelSeries World of Warcraft Gaming Mouse: Legendary Edition is both PC and Mac compatible and will release some time in September and set you back $79.99. 

 

5 Reasons Your Product Documentation Is a Marketing Asset (Mashable)

Posted: 12 Aug 2011 04:37 PM PDT

Mike Puterbaugh Mike Puterbaugh – Fri Aug 12, 7:37 pm ET

Mike Puterbaugh is the VP of marketing at MindTouch, the leader in social knowledge bases, product help and enterprise collaboration. You can follow him on Twitter at @mputerbaugh23. As a CMO, it's important to understand what clever technology developers and open source leaders have known for years: Great product documentation isn't loathsome -- it's marketing, and darn good marketing at that.

[More from Mashable: HOW TO: Personalize Your Marketing With Social Data]

Today, the smartest apps and campaigns dominate headlines and boardrooms. Meanwhile, documentation has become marketing's secret weapon.

Documentation is the language that accompanies a product, often outlining its development, design, technical language and marketing strategy in clear, definitive terms.

[More from Mashable: Starbucks Card Guy Solicits $8,700 in Coffees for Strangers]

Ultimately, good documentation won't comprise a cost, but rather, a profit. Furthermore, it's an SEO godsend. Documentation can indicate how to evolve products and spark cross-functional communication. It can reveal holes in the sales funnel that otherwise would have eluded you.

In marketing terms, documentation can put you into contact with prospective investors and customers alike. And while much of marketing can be asynchronous and speculative, documentation remains reliable and predictable.

Here's why you need to start thinking about strategic documentation.

1. Credible Language vs. Marketing Lingo

Documentation can be your best bet as a source of leads.

Integrate documentation into your marketing automation system (Omniture, Eloqua or Marketo, for example) to enhance communication about your product's features and benefits. Unfortunately, many marketers forget or disregard this step, despite the minimum work involved.

On the other hand, should your documentation look or read like marketing copy? Of course not. Documentation is decidedly not marketing copy. It should be credible, and absent the jargon and salesmanship that customers and prospects have come to expect from the marketing kind. Understandable, your documentation should still be able to demonstrate how well your company understands its market and target customers.

Furthermore, you can discover much about a company based on its documentation. It allows investors and participants a peek behind the company curtain. Savvy buyers -- and even users of free products -- use documentation as a gauge for company seriousness and dependability. Again, developers have known this since the dawn of the web.

At one time or another, you've probably assumed that documentation contains highly technical language. That may be the case, but not exclusively. Documentation should be granular, but also social and searchable. The best documentation contains both generalist and specialist material, designed to engage each intended audience.

2. Search Engine Optimization

Documentation should be keyword-rich, densely linked and expertly structured. Importantly, it doesn't raise the red flags that other types of content might.

Keep in mind that fresh, social, collaborative and, therefore frequently updated documentation makes it more Google-friendly. Making documentation social from the beginning will ensure steady traffic and save unnecessary stress and upkeep.

Scatter keywords through your documentation, link deliberately, and apply filters and tags. Most importantly, update every now and then to make sure your documentation remains current.

Documentation is an incredible SEO asset, but too often it doesn't get treated as such. Sometimes marketing won't have a hand in the construction process. Other times documentation is left unrevised, and thus, outdated.

3. Cross-Functionality

Company documentation makes for better cross-department communication and collaboration. It forges connections among product, marketing, services and support. Therefore, it's strategic for everyone.

First and foremost, documentation responsibilities should probably fall within the CMO's duties because that's where its effect starts and stops. But regardless of ownership or flow charts, documentation can get your SEO and your product team talking in ways they never have before. The same goes for support, PR, services and tech teams.

4. Community Building

Documentation is also a wonderful way to create a community around your product or service.

Although documentation has a bad rap for being wonky, realize that it can actually present an opportunity for community and customer congregation. Why not give them more to do, allow them a seat at the table, and let them find themselves in the product?

There is a profound ladder of engagement that begins with documentation. Documentation sits at the bottom, forming the foundation of interaction. From it, all further engagement flows -- interactions can span over social media, to more monolithic, top-down content, and eventually evolve into emails and phone conversations.

Documentation is a company's lifeblood, seldom seen but crucial to function and health.

5. Identifying Needs

Finally, documentation is a very effective way of identifying unmet customer needs.

It holds a wealth of information that your product team will drool over, and yet that feedback loop is seldom taken advantage of. What are the most commented-upon items, for example? The most viewed? The most cited?

Furthermore, your documentation should contain analytics -- there is no greater company intelligence. Ideally, analytics consist of correct, statistically significant signals that reveal cause and effect, with which you can reliably make decisions.

Used correctly, documentation can make your company a better informed, intuitive operation.

Conclusion

Previously, documentation was thought of as a necessary evil. Or worse even -- a black hole that consumed budgets and brain function. But two major things have since changed:

First, we invested in social software. And documentation can be inherently social. For many companies, it's a collaborative tool -- a link between internal departments and external audiences. Collaboratively creating documentation content drives down costs and makes the task less daunting.

Secondly, documentation can inform other functions and services. Tie-ins, integrations and all manner of APIs mean more automation, and therefore less long-term work. Ultimately, documentation should leverage and gather all of the great work your company is performing elsewhere.

As a CMO, there is no more strategic, high-margin initiative you can undertake than optimal documentation.

It's not a sexy undertaking, but it will earn you the respect of your peers, more effective company management and a more collaborative team. Because it's not about this quarter or this year, but rather, it's about affecting competitive advantage and long-term growth.

Images courtesy of iStockphoto, AK2, and Flickr, marciookabe, Nearsoft

This story originally published on Mashable here.

at 9:25 PM

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

My Blog List