There's no such thing as 'social media revolution'

There seems to be a contingent out there that analyzes each of the globe's various political conflicts and attempts to figure out, through plenty of speculation and the occasional Wikipedia look-ups of far-flung sovereignties, which uprising will mark the first true "social media revolution."


A dictator toppled by Twitter or ousted through the efforts of a Facebook group? It's an enticing idea, particularly for those who are in the business of social media and have a personal stake of sorts in tallying each instance of social media's global value making headlines. Twitter punditry this week has been peppered with speculation about whether upheaval in Tunisia or the subsequent anti-government protests in Egypt might amount to the "first" true revolution spawned by social media. But this just isn't the right way to measure things: the occurrence of a "social media revolution," at this point, should be neither noteworthy nor remarkable. If a dictator is overthrown or a government ousted, it would be notable if Facebook or Twitter weren't used.


That's because social media is a part of the world we live in and has become such a crucial form of communication that it will factor into any political movement nearly anywhere in the world. In other words, the use of Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube should not be what's worth talking about. At this point, it takes away from the substance of the revolution (or lack thereof) itself.


This sort of rhetoric has been going on for nearly two years when an anti-government uprising in Iran swelled up through Twitter and, as a result of traditional media crackdowns, became the primary medium in which much of the world knew about what was going on in the Islamic nation. The activists' efforts ultimately had far less impact on the government than many of the breathless Twitter observers expected, and for too many of them it's now known as the movement in which everyone tinted their Twitter profile photos with green as a sign of solidarity (which now seems awfully passive). This, alas, wasn't "the social media revolution." And so the pundits moved on.


So let's look at the basic numbers. Facebook has more than 600 million users around the world, an inarguable lock on the mainstream in much of the world and significant penetration even in the countries where it doesn't have as much reach. Twitter is about one-third its size, though its most active users tend to be more in the vein of newshounds and culture fans than FarmVille players and vacation photo swappers--which may be the reason why the smaller Twitter is as important, if not more so, than Facebook in political activism. Both social media services are actively looking to expand their reach in developing countries, particularly Facebook, which has launched mobile sites and applications geared to lower-end cell phones and slower connections.
The truth is that smaller elements of "social media revolution" have been all around us already for over half a decade--even in our own, comparatively humdrum political system in which "revolution" means a switch in the partisan balance of a governing body accompanied by plenty of red-and-blue news-ticker graphics on cable networks. George Allen, a Republican senator from Virginia, was in a tight race for win re-election in 2006 until a video from a campaign rally surfaced on YouTube in which he called one of his opponent's campaign staff volunteers by a bizarre epithet that turned out to be a racial slur of sorts. The video went viral, Allen lost, and his "macaca moment" has been widely highlighted as the source of his downfall--in spite of the presence of countless strategists, publicists, and glossy campaign ads, social media's power prevailed.


Yes, social media can lead to the improbable rise of leaders who otherwise might never have had a shot. Without Meetup and the readership of liberal blogs, former Vermont governor Howard Dean might never had had a shot at the Democratic presidential nomination (which, of course, he lost). In 2008, Barack Obama's campaign team's digital savviness was a crucial component in the candidate's popularity among young voters who heavily favored him at the polls. Two years after Obama's inauguration, these things should no longer surprise us--nor should be we be surprised that, yes, social media is a vital instrument in political change all over the world.


That's the way things are in an age full of widely accessible yet largely uncontrolled media, in which the barrier to entry for any individual has been vastly lowered and the potential power of an organized mass can impact longstanding establishments. These technological developments have been groundbreaking. But they are not new. And "revolutionaries," whoever they may be, will use social media as an expanded set of tools for the tasks that have always been and remain the most crucial to activists: amassing support, communicating with like-minded people, and spreading the word. The tactics haven't changed. It's just that the available channels of communication have expanded.


Where it does get interesting, social media-wise, is where and when governments choose to crack down. On Tuesday evening, Twitter finally confirmed that Egypt was blocking access to its service after initially refusing to comment on the matter directly, but there were no reports on attempts to control Facebook or any other grassroots organization tool. This sort of thing provides some insight into what a government sees as its biggest digital threats and how it attempts to control and dissuade opposition forces. But the real focus ought to be on what's being said. The real meat of a political uprising is the message itself, and hype about digital media's impact on it all should be well enough accepted by now that it shouldn't take over the limelight.
And, should that successful "social media revolution" come along, I hope the digerati gives the successful activists some credit: If they topple a dictator, the real reason isn't that Facebook Groups made it possible for them to organize or because they generated a clever Twitter hashtag. Social media has changed the world, but by no means does it provide a substitute for the human energy and willpower that can bring down governments and cause global reverberations. Let's focus on understanding what really happens.


Besides, if you're keeping a scorecard for social media, you might want to note that, 600 million Facebook users later, it's already won.




Source: http://news.cnet.com/

Microsoft goes on the iPad offensive

Microsoft may have laid out its plans to have Windows running on any device while unveiling the next version of Windows at CES earlier this month, but it's not there yet. In the meantime, we're still stuck with the current version of Windows, which, for better or for worse, cannot fit into the types of devices its successor promises to fit.


That very situation--along with a lack of product from Microsoft's hardware partners, has led to a relative dearth of Windows 7 in tablet PCs. It can also be argued that it's responsible, in part, for what has turned out to be much stronger than expected sales for the iPad, of which Apple sold 7.33 million units during the last three months of 2010, nabbing the "best-selling tech gadget in history" title following its introduction.

   One of the slides detailing how Microsoft stacks up Windows 7 devices with Apple's iOS on the iPad.

But Microsoft's got a plan to position Windows 7 as the better of the two computing platforms. In a set of slides sent out to its reseller partners, and acquired by CNET sister site ZDNet, Microsoft has outlined the various ways in which Windows offers more security and breakout features, while also being more of a chameleon--working its way into more than just one hardware form factor.
The 10 slides, which you can view on ZDNet, focus mainly on the enterprise, highlighting key differences where Windows checks all the boxes for things like getting work done offline, supporting Microsoft Office and its data synchronization tools, and working with existing lines of business applications. But Microsoft also takes the iPad to task on compatibility with things such as support for peripherals, security protocols, Adobe's Flash and Microsoft's own Silverlight.
At the heart of Microsoft's argument, though, the company paints the iPad as a consumption device that doesn't play nice with existing enterprise security or application standards. To back that up, the company breaks down the ways in which Windows 7 slate form factor PCs have three distinct advantages over the iPad: optimization for online and offline data use, a design for both consuming and creating content, and support for peripherals. Microsoft also highlights Windows' pen and writing technology, speech recognition, and touch support, alongside its natural user interface and video technologies, all of which it deems to be "rapidly changing."
For companies on the fence about bringing the iPad into their business, Microsoft is going with a "one size does not fit all" approach, noting that some companies may need devices that work better with their security and compliance needs. The more telling look, though, is what Microsoft is trying to pitch to companies already using, or plan to use, Apple's iPad. Microsoft is telling those partners to "implement a Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) to reduce risk in your enterprise," meaning that they'd be making use of tools like Microsoft's Hyper-V Server, and App-V.
During last year's CES keynote, Microsoft's CEO Steve Ballmer paid special attention to a group of Windows 7 slate concepts, though the only one of the bunch that made it to consumers' hands during 2010 was HP's Slate 500 device. At this year's show, slates were all but missing from the company's keynote, instead being replaced by myriad devices designed to show off Windows' next ARM capabilities. What's still unclear is whether Microsoft's more nascent, though already ARM-friendly, Windows Phone OS will make its way into a tablet form factor, something speculated about since the platform's introduction at last year's Mobile World Congress.




Source: http://news.cnet.com/

Mobiles attract hi-tech thieves

Cyber criminals are starting to move away from Windows and targeting other technologies, says a security report.

The annual report from net giant Cisco suggests that mobile phone operating systems are becoming increasingly popular with hi-tech criminals.

It predicts 2011 will see a significant number of attacks directed at smartphones, mobile software and users.

Despite this, the vast majority of current viruses are aimed at Windows and programs that run on it.

The trend towards mobile malware took a significant turn in late 2009, says Cisco with the appearance of a virus called Zitmo. This was a mobile version of the Zeus Windows trojan that has proved hugely popular with criminals keen to steal logins to online bank accounts.

Also, wrote Patrick Peterson, senior security researcher at Cisco, improved Windows security made it harder for hi-tech criminals to find new ways to attack PCs.

A growing target, said the report, were Apple products such as the iPhone. Statistics gathered by Cisco suggest a growing number of vulnerabilities are being found in Apple operating systems.

Cisco said Apple's close oversight of what can run on its phones was limiting the effectiveness of attacks but many people were "jailbreaking" their phones putting them at risk from unofficial apps that have malicious elements buried within them.

Apple was not alone among mobile operating systems attracting attention, said the report, attacks were also starting to focus on Google's Android software.

Mr Peterson said Cisco had seen lots of research and development by criminal groups as they focus on mobiles and work out the best way to attack portable gadgets.

Evidence of this was seen in the localised and targeted phishing scams sent out to mobiles as criminals seek to trick groups of users into handing over passwords.

Trojans aimed at Android that booby trap apps that run on phones or bury premium rate links in ads were also starting to turn up. For instance, in late December 2010 the Geinimi trojan for Android was found that can steal almost any of the data on a handset.

"The relative youth of the Android OS, including its apps and ecosystem, combined with the sheer number of users will make this a very attractive platform for exploitation," Scott Olechowski, threat research manager at Cisco.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/

I Don't Want Wall Street in My Social Network

If LinkedIn goes public, will I suddenly be smacked with an onslaught of spam, bludgeoned by pop-ups or, even worse, have my personal information auctioned off to the highest bidder? If you don't think that's a possibility, then you don't understand why Facebook and Groupon have been christened social networking's most valuable sites. In a word: advertising.



As someone who sees value in at least some social networking sites, I'm more than a little uncomfortable with all the attention that Wall Street suddenly is directing toward this sector.

For the past few weeks, we've been bombarded with stories about the potential for various social networking companies to raise ridiculous sums of money in public stock offerings. Naturally, Facebook, the undisputed ruler of the social networking realm, has garnered the most headlines, along with the highest estimated valuation at US$50 billion.

Groupon, the purveyor of discount coupons for local businesses, is worth $15 billion, making it the second most valuable social networking site, according to Wall Street estimates.

Source: http://www.technewsworld.com

I find fault with these numbers for several reasons, starting with the fact that my two favorite social networking sites -- LinkedIn and Twitter -- have been deemed to be worth a mere $2 billion and $3.7 billion, respectively.

The Future of Social Networking

Actually, I have no vested interest -- financially, emotionally or otherwise -- in how much any particular social networking site is judged to be worth. As a technology journalist, however, I am extremely interested in how all this talk of multibillion dollar payoffs will impact the future of social networking.

Twitter and LinkedIn are my favorite social networks because I find them to be effective business tools. LinkedIn helps me keep in contact with past business associates in a way that no contact list ever could. Whenever my connections update their profiles, I know where they are and what they're doing, and I always have an easy way of reaching them.

I know Facebook does the same thing for old friends, but Facebook also has a lot of, let's just call it "juvenile," stuff floating around the site that I'd rather not get involved in. So, I find other ways of staying in touch with friends.

There is one thing I don't like about LinkedIn: the way some people join special interest groups -- such as the Media, Advertising and Journalism Jobs Network that I belong to -- in order to pepper other members with emails about their resume writing services or Internet-based business opportunities.

I have to confess to using Twitter to promote this column, but that feed only goes to people who have chosen to follow me, which means they presumably are interested in what I have to say.

While I get more commercial messages through LinkedIn than I would like, I find them fairly easy to ignore and even easier to delete. I fear that might change, however, if LinkedIn goes public and is forced to start generating sufficient revenue to satisfy the shareholders.

Selling User Info to the Highest Bidder

Will I suddenly be smacked with an onslaught of spam, bludgeoned by pop-ups or, even worse, have my personal information auctioned off to the highest bidder?

If you don't think that's a possibility, then you don't understand why Facebook and Groupon have been christened social networking's most valuable sites.

Wall Street obviously sees advertising as the primary way of making money in this arena, and Facebook and Groupon currently are in a better position than any of the other networks to turn large numbers of their users into ad consumers.

Groupon has become so popular in some cities that it has generated complaints from businesses that found themselves confronted with more customers than they could handle -- and actually losing money in the process -- after issuing Groupon coupons.

Though it continues to wrestle with privacy issues, Facebook has maintained something that all Internet-based advertisers covet: a large, loyal user base. The social games that are becoming increasingly popular features of Facebook are enticing users to spend more time on the site, making it even more appealing to advertisers.

While social networks seem like ideal platforms for generating ad revenue, I question the validity of the valuations currently being attached to these sites. I'm skeptical mainly because the primary source of these valuations is Goldman Sachs -- the same Goldman Sachs that the SEC recently charged with committing multiple acts of fraud in connection with the nationwide mortgage crisis.

I Don't Trust Goldman Sachs

Goldman established the value for Facebook after investing $450 million in the company and securing an agreement to offer shares of Facebook to a select group of its most wealthy clients while the company remains private. This deal also gives Goldman the inside track on being the investment bank that handles what is expected to be an eventual Facebook IPO. Goldman also is lobbying to play the same role when Groupon goes public.

In the case of the private Facebook stock offering, Goldman expects to sell shares to investors who pony up a minimum of $2 million each. It would then put that money into a special fund that it manages on behalf of those clients. This type of fund, known as a "special purpose vehicle," was used by Enron before that once high-flying energy company imploded in a major financial  scandal in the 1990s.

Soon after word of this arrangement became public, Goldman announced that it had decided to limit the offering of privately traded Facebook shares to non-U.S. clients. The SEC has neither confirmed nor denied that it questioned this deal, but I find it hard to believe that Goldman didn't believe it was about to come under some new regulatory scrutiny.

Beyond my distrust of Goldman Sachs, I don't like the idea of social networking companies going public, at least at this time, because that typically turns out to be the first step in an industry shakeout. Remember when AOL and then Yahoo were the hottest names in the tech industry?

I don't see Facebook crashing and burning under the weight of an IPO, but Groupon, which already has many competitors, could be vulnerable. A company like LinkedIn also could find itself in trouble if it were to start working harder to satisfy shareholders than users.

I'd just hate to see companies that could potentially employ a lot of people for a long time -- and possibly create technology that could help other companies -- flame out prematurely just so a handful Wall Street bankers can cash a few more fat bonus checks. I saw enough of that when the dot-com bubble was deflating.

Facebook Drops Another 'P' Bomb

Facebook no doubt hoped to minimize the repercussions from its latest privacy change by announcing it late on Friday, but there could be a heavier blowback from its move than the company anticipated. "Many [users] won't realize that they have given permission for their phone numbers to be gathered," said Appitalism.com CEO Simon Buckingham. When they do, he predicted, hell is going to break loose.


Facebook dropped a privacy bombshell on an unsuspecting user base before the start of the holiday weekend: Going forward, it will make a user's address and mobile phone number accessible as part of the User Graph object. That means that users' addresses and mobile numbers are now available to third party developers of such apps as, say, FarmVille.


Facebook acknowledged it was dealing with "sensitive information" in the blog post making the announcement. For that reason, it created a special opt-in permission requirement for the phone number and address to be explicitly granted to the application developer  through Facebook's standard permissions dialog.


It also pointed out that these permissions only provide access to a user's address and mobile phone number -- not to friends' addresses or mobile phone numbers.


Privacy Uproar


Privacy and security  advocates, not surprisingly, were unimpressed by Facebook's nod to consumers with its opt-in form.


"It is a consent requirement, but the notice is so confusing to users it makes it seem as though the information is necessary for the application to work," Marc Rotenberg, EPIC executive director, told MacNewsWorld. "Then there is the very real risk that over time Facebook will change the default opt-in to opt-out. After all it has made so many changes to its privacy policy, why not this one too at some point?"


Facebook did not respond to MacNewsWorld's request for comment in time for publication.


As for Facebook's decision to grant developers this information, Rotenberg expressed more scorn.


In general, granting information to third parties has become a very slippery slope, with little attention being paid to what they are using it for.


"Increasingly, it is being used for purposes other than app development," noted Rotenberg, "such as advertising or behavioral targeting."


Security Threat


Facebook's decision will leave users open to security threats by rogue developers, suggested Graham Cluley of Internet security research firm Sophos in a blog post.


"Facebook is already plagued by rogue applications that post spam links to users' walls, and point users to survey scams that earn them commission -- and even sometimes trick users into handing over their cellphone numbers to sign them up for a premium rate service," he wrote.


Shady app developers will find it easier to gather this data now that Facebook has legitimatized it, he continued, predicting an increase in identity theft as a consequence of making this and other data available on Facebook.


Developers are also at risk with this system, pointed out Douglas Karr, founder of DK New Media and author of Corporate Blogging for Dummies.


"Since this data isn't 'scrubbed' against national do not call and do not mail data, Facebook may be putting application developers in a precarious, dangerous position if the data is somehow misused," he said.


Another Backlash


With so many ways this decision could go wrong, there is a significant likelihood of a backlash, predicted Simon Buckingham, CEO and founder of Appitalism.com. "This is a major change for users, and many won't realize that they have given permission for their phone numbers to be gathered."


When they do, he said, hell is going to break loose. "With 600 million members, Facebook needs to err on the side of caution. This type of information is sensitive, and it is almost guaranteed that a lot of users will be unhappy about its disclosure."


Source: http://www.technewsworld.com

Microsoft Gives Semi-Pros a Free Web Dev Toolbox

Micrsoft's WebMatrix is designed to let website developers with even low skill levels easily create and publish Websites. "It's a programming environment, and it's quite complicated," Web devAaron Hee-Stacpoole said. "I'd say that stating beginners can use it is not quite accurate. You can't have something that's really powerful and also easy to use -- it's somewhat of a paradox. I think semi-pros will use it."


Microsoft on Thursday released WebMatrix, a free Web development tool that it claims lets website developers of all skill levels create, customize and publish websites to the Internet easily.


It also announced an ecosystem of 40 open source application partners around WebMatrix.


This is a revival of a previous project, also called "WebMatrix," that offered a free tool in 2002 to help Web developers get started with ASP.Net, Microsoft representative Jackie Lawrence told TechNewsWorld.


Microsoft has long been at war with the open source movement -- could this be an attempt to re-establish its credibility with OSS adherents?


The Threads Making Up WebMatrix


WebMatrix includes IIS Express, a development Web server; ASP.net, which is a Web framework; and SQL Server Compact, an embedded database, Microsoft representative Lawrence said.


It also includes Razor, a new inline syntax for coding pages that adds dynamic functionality to HTML. This syntax minimizes the number of keystrokes required, Lawrence said. It doesn't require users to learn a new language.


Microsoft plans to use Razor with standard inline pages as well as with future ASP.Net MVC releases as an optional view engine, Lawrence stated. MVC stands for Model View Controller.


Microsoft's shipping a beta release of ASP.Net MVC 3 with WebMatrix and NuPack. ASP.Net MVC 3 enables clean separation between models and views, reducing complexity in architectural design and increasing the flexibility and manageability of the code, Lawrence remarked.


WebMatrix lets developers write code in HTML, CSS (Cascading Style Sheets) or JavaScript. Developers can use it to write HTML5 code, Lawrence said.


WebMatrix is integrated with the NuGet open source package management system. Formerly called "NuPack," NuGet lets developers who maintain open source projects package up their libraries and register them with an online gallery or catalog that's searchable. Client-side NuGet tools include full Microsoft Visual Studio integration.


WebMatrix supports multiple programming syntaxes, including ASP.Net, Razor and PHP, as well as Web helpers. Web helpers give a single line-of-code solution for complex coding tasks such as inserting Twitter feeds of video, Lawrence said.


Further, WebMatrix includes a search engine optimization reporting tool so users can build search-friendly websites.


Comments on WebMatrix


"This looks like a pretty strong offering from Microsoft," Web developer  Aaron Hee-Stacpoole told TechNewsWorld. "It looks like they've positioned themselves pretty well with content management services like Drupal. I don't think it'll dominate the industry but people will definitely use it."


However, newbies may not find WebMatrix quite so easy to use as Microsoft contends.


"It's a programming environment, and it's quite complicated," Hee-Stacpoole commented. "I'd say that stating beginners can use it is not quite accurate. You can't have something that's really powerful and also easy to use -- it's somewhat of a paradox. I think semi-pros will use it."


Thursday's release follows three betas of WebMatrix, first in July 2010 and then in October and subsequently November.


Open Is as Open Does


In addition to using the open source NuGet, Microsoft has rounded up 40 open source application providers in its WebMatrix system. They include Joomla and Umbraco, both open source content management systems.


These tie-ins could give rise to speculation that Microsoft's trying to mend its rocky relationship with the open source movement.


"Microsoft's a founding sponsor of the OuterCurve Foundation, and we have a collection of projects under the ASP.Net open source gallery," Paula Hunter, executive director of the OuterCurve Foundation, told TechNewsWorld. "All those projects either came to us from Microsoft or from people that are deploying .Net and who feel those projects are useful to the community."


OuterCurve was set up by Microsoft in September of 2009 as the CodePlex Foundation. It was renamed in September "because there was a lot of confusion between the Foundation and CodePlex.com forge, which is a Microsoft property and has no relationship with us," OuterCurve's Hunter stated.


The establishment of the CodePlex Foundation immediately drew fire from the Open Invention Network, an intellectual property company promoting Linux and open source. The Network had purchased 22 Linux-related patents Microsoft had previously sold to the Allied Security Trust. It accused Microsoft of engaging in a covert war against Linux.


Skepticism about Microsoft's intentions toward open source runs deep in the community.


However, this fact doesn't preclude peaceful coexistence between open source and Microsoft.


"I don't think WebMatrix will supplant any of the open source technologies," Hee-Stacpoole opined. "It will probably coexist with them as Microsoft as done in the past."

Source: http://www.technewsworld.com/

At 10, highlighting Wikipedia's past and future

With just 20 simple words and two entries, it began: "Hello, world." And "Humor me. Go there and add a little article. It will take all of five or ten minutes."

Written by Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales on January 15, 2001, those four sentences ushered in one of the most widely used and important reference projects in history, let alone on the Internet: Wikipedia.
Tomorrow, Wikipedia turns 10 years old. It's hard to imagine that a tiny, user-created project founded by two unknowns behind the online expert-written encyclopedia Nupedia could have grown into a project featuring more than 17 million articles in more than 270 languages, including 3.5 million in English, and more than 100,000 each in 32 other tongues. But Sanger and Wales, who had previously started Nupedia, which was having trouble getting off the ground, saw the virtues of a fairly new Web editing and creation tool called a wiki and decided to run with it.

Now, all those years later, Wikipedia is the fifth-most popular Web property in the world, attracts 410 million unique visitors a month, is used by 42 percent of American adults, according to a Pew Internet study, and has made Wales--currently a member of the board of trustees of the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, which oversees Wikipedia--a household name, at least in technology circles.

Along the way, the project has gone through no small number of ups and downs. It has had its share of controversies, including the departure of Sanger in 2002 and subsequent public disagreements between him and Wales over whether he was a founder, and the infamous "Seigenthaler incident," in which the article about former Robert Kennedy aide John Seigenthaler was edited to include a baseless suggestion that he was involved in the assassinations of both Kennedy brothers.

As well, there's been no shortage of consternation over Wales' role on the Wikimedia board, and about whether Wikipedia is a real research tool or if it promotes laziness among students unwilling or unable to search for primary sources to cite.

But for the most part, the story of Wikipedia's first 10 years has been one of steady growth, a rise in stature, and a place among the most impressive user-created projects ever built.

Hits the 'sweet spot' 

To Andrew Lih, the author of "The Wikipedia Revolution," deciding to study Wales' and Sanger's creation came from his realization that the project hit a "sweet spot" and addressed what he called a "gap in human knowledge between news and history books."

With Wikipedia, Lih continued, Wales and Sanger, and the community of thousands of authors and editors they inspired, were taking on that gap, having created a "continuously updated, changing state of human knowledge [that is] an archive living in front of our very eyes."

It's hard to argue that. In its early days, Wikipedia was seen as a poor-man's Britannica. But it has long since surpassed the size and scope of that venerable project, which has "hundreds of thousands of articles." Indeed, where content on Wikipedia was once seen as having questionable accuracy, given that it can be created by anyone, expert or not, a 2005 study by the journal "Nature" laid that notion to rest, concluding that the free, open-source encyclopedia's accuracy was on par with that of the for-profit, expert-written project.

In 2005, in a bid to explain Wikipedia to his readers, "Esquire" magazine writer A.J. Jacobs came up with an imaginative approach to demonstrating the way that the site's volunteer editors clean up inaccuracies. First, Jacobs wrote an error-plagued version of a story about Wikipedia. Then he posted the text to Wikipedia, letting loose the community on the article. Eventually, having had the story cleaned up and fixed by Wikipedia users, "Esquire" ran both versions--illustrating its evolution.

Was Wikipedia inevitable? 

With the tremendous growth of the Internet in the late 1990s, as well as the emergence of numerous and powerful online communities, not to mention the development in 1995 by Ward Cunningham of the wiki, an obvious question is whether someone else would not have come up with the same idea as Wikipedia if Sanger and Wales hadn't gotten there first.

To Joi Ito, a well-known Internet investor and the chairman of the board of Creative Commons, the answer isn't clear-cut. Ito said that he thinks Wikipedia as we know it today may well have only arisen due to the set of specific circumstances that gelled around the site back in 2001.

"The core community back...when it started was really, really special," Ito said. "I called them 'bookworms for the common good.' I think that a community isn't a single person, but it really was like the Ocean's 11 or whatever Mission Impossible-like metaphor you want to use."

As Ito put it, serendipity certainly had a lot to do with it, but he suggested it's hard to argue with the fact that the decision by Wales, Sanger, and other early decision-makers to keep the project free and open-source, helped make it what it is. Had someone else come along and created an online encyclopedia, they might well have tried to make it commercial, and that might have limited its size.

Lih agreed.

"I don't think it could be what it is today without the free license," Lih said. "It [was] so important to grab the attention and passion of so many volunteers. If a project like that [had been] started by Microsoft or even Apple...if you are going to labor that long [to create or edit an article] on something owned by a for-profit, you're not going to have as many volunteers as if the mission is pure. That is something that is quite unique, and was a way to attract a lot of volunteers in a very small amount of time."

Further, Lih argued, Wales' personality had a lot to do with the project's success. After Sanger's departure, Wales was the unquestioned face of Wikipedia, yet Lih said that Wales found a smart balance between knowing when to stay out of the way and let the community do its thing and when it was necessary to assert his authority.Ito suggested that this was a difficult balance to strike.

"I think the face of the organization has a huge impact on how the public perceives it," Ito said. "It's very difficult to have a project without a face. On the other hand, it's very tricky because leadership of open-source and online [communities] is really different, and most community members will feel that leaders get too much credit or that leadership is overrated.
Of course, the question of leadership of Wikipedia, at least in the early days, was in dispute, and likely led to the departure of Sanger from the project.
Wales was not available for comment for this story. For his part, Sanger, who has been critical of Wales and Wikipedia in the past, told CNET he has no regrets about having left the project. "I've had plenty of opportunities to get back involved in Wikipedia," Sanger said. "And as I've gotten farther and farther away in time from when I was involved and farther in psychological distance, I've had less and less desire to be involved."These days, Sanger said, he rarely uses Wikipedia.

But Sanger, who is currently working on online educational video tools for children called WatchKnow, also said that he nonetheless has advice he thinks Wikipedia needs to take as it moves ahead.

First, he suggested that the site's board of advisors must begin to take the amount of pornography that can be found on the site more seriously, and find a way to label it so parents can filter it. And second, Sanger, long a proponent of expert authors, thinks that Wikipedia needs to "adopt a system whereby they allow experts to be...identified as such, and to give comment and ratings of versions of articles."

Limited growth 


For any project that's grown as big as Wikipedia, there inevitably comes a point at which the trend line evens out.To Lih, Wikipedia has reached that point, and those deeply involved in the project are only just starting to accept that fact.

One problem, Lih said, is that the opportunity for new volunteers to come to Wikipedia and create great articles has long since become rare. That, of course, is because, with 17 million articles, most subjects of human knowledge have already been broached. What's left is largely pop culture and current events, Lih said, meaning that the main impetus that drew so many of the early power users is harder to come by.
And at the same time, existing editors are more protective of the site than ever, keeping watchful eyes on favorite articles and regarding newcomers with what might be seen as suspicion.

"That kind of viral rush of [creating or] editing an article is hard to capture today," Lih said. And longtime volunteers "are not slapping newcomers on the back and saying, 'Welcome to Wikipedia.' It's, 'Hey, what did you just do? Unless you're doing something useful, go away.'"

That could lead to a problem finding the next generation of power users, Lih worries, a dynamic that threatens the site's future growth. "Where are the next 3.5 million articles [in English] going to come from," Lih said.

The next 10 years 

But Lih doesn't think Wikipedia is in any way finished. Quite the contrary, the "Wikipedia Revolution" author thinks that the key to the project's next 10 years of growth lies in its ability to attract significant new sources of content.

And that's why he thinks it's crucial that the Wikimedia Foundation be successful in outreach efforts to cultural institutions like government, libraries, archives, and museums, that can provide the site with new material.
Another big effort will likely be a push to add large amounts of multimedia. But before that can happen, Lih said, tools must be created that allow for collaborative creation and editing of video and audio.
As well, despite being available in more than 270 languages, there are still many more to go, and that's something that seems like an obvious growth area for the project. Indeed, Wales told the Washington Post that he wants to see Wikipedia reach every language on Earth.

It may take some time before Wikipedia reaches that point, but then, the site isn't going anywhere. With 17 million articles and a still-loyal stable of thousands of authors and editors, there's plenty of horsepower to keep the site vital for the foreseeable future.

And what is its legacy, after 10 years. To Lih, Wikipedia has turned conventional wisdom on its head.
"There's a famous saying," he said, "'Winners get to write the history books.' This is no longer true. [Now], the people get to write the history books."


Source: http://news.cnet.com/

Google, Facebook and Yahoo to test new net addresses

A global trial of the net's new addressing system is being planned for 8 June.


The test is being held to raise awareness about the imminent change from version 4 of the addressing scheme to version 6.


Net giants Google, Facebook, Akamai and Yahoo have committed to taking part in the "test flight" of IPv6.


Net firms are being encouraged to switch to IPv6 as addresses in the old scheme will run out by November 2011.


"The good news is that internet users don't need to do anything special to prepare for World IPv6 Day," said Lorenzo Colitti, a network engineer at Google in a blog post.


"Our current measurements suggest that the vast majority (99.95%) of users will be unaffected. However, in rare cases, users may experience connectivity problems, often due to misconfigured or misbehaving home network devices."


The World IPv6 Day is being co-ordinated by the Internet Society, a non-profit group which educates people and companies about net issues. It has provided a webpage through which people can test their Ipv6 readiness.


On 8 June, those who sign up will make their pages available via IPv6 for 24 hours to help show up and iron out problems created by the switch to the new addressing scheme.


"By providing an opportunity for the internet industry to collaborate to test IPv6 readiness we expect to lay the groundwork for large-scale IPv6 adoption and help make IPv6 ready for prime time," said Leslie Daigle, chief internet technology officer at the Internet Society in a statement.


Google already offers an IPv6 version of its search site as does Facebook.


The addressing scheme used by most sites now is defined in version 4 of the Internet Protocol. This has an address space of about four billion entries.


While this figure was considered to be enough in the late 1970s when IPv4 was being developed it has proved to be wanting as the net has grown in popularity and more and more people and devices use it.


At current estimates the pool of IPv4 addresses will run entirely dry in early November 2011.


Many net authorities and organisations have been calling for net firms to switch to IPv6 which has an effectively unlimited address space, but progress has been slow.


In November 2010 Vint Cerf, one of the fathers of the internet, warned that the net faced "turbulent times" if it did not move quickly to adopt IPv6.


Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk

Why Facebook Messages Are Lethal?

Many a times, Facebook has taken credit for its new Messaging service. The media is just ranting about this cool new feature, which was primarily a result of a conflict of interests between Google and Facebook. However, certain features of the new messaging service will prove problematic for you… How so? Read on:


Not Much of an Openness


Yeah, we know that MS Office is the dominant productivity suite in the market. However, Facebook is also trying to exclude all others, in an attempt to be the first choice of millions of consumers. The Executive in the Office Group wrote, “I’m really excited about being able to make it even easier for people to use Office to access and share information across different devices, networks and platforms.”


Openness naturally demands an easy access regardless of the hardware and software based obstacles.


Limited Interoperability


Facebook’s tight integration with the Microsoft Office Suite may not be that much tight. Office is good for interoperability with other people, but there are million others who’re using Open Office and LibreOffice. What about them?


Facebook does have friendly relationships with Microsoft. There’s no denying to it, because we’ve see the Bing and Facebook collaboration. However, Facebook is mostly focusing on Microsoft Office through its messaging service, which is not good. The social media needs to open its doors for other corporate sectors as well. Facebook users will have to stick to Microsoft Office IF they need exchange documents online.




Limited Choice Criterion


Microsoft likes to protect and lock its clients, within a whirlwind of glazy features. Apple likes to do the same thing, it is too exclusive. So what impact does it have on Facebook? To be honest, the social media platform’s continuing partnership with Microsoft will eventually turn it into a walled garden sort of thing. People won’t be able to use the software that’s out of the box….


Source: http://www.technews.org/

Will iPad and iPhone home button be replaced with multi-touch gestures?

The iPad 2 and iPhone 5 may come without the reassuring familiarity of the home button as Apple's introduction of multi-touch gestures is set to replace its functionality.


Bad news for glove-wearers and button fans, rather than simply hitting home we'll be tracing our fingers across the screen to awaken our handsets and launch the app switcher.


A source told BGR that Apple already has employees testing iPads and iPhones with no home buttons, so we could see a buttonless look as early as the next generation of each device.


A dream come true for Jobs


Doing away with the home button will make a significant difference to the devices' designs, making Steve Jobs' original vision of a buttonless handset come into being.


In other iPad 2 news, it looks like Photo Booth will be appearing on the iPad 2 – it's pretty much a given at this point that the next iPad will feature at least a front-mounted camera.


Apple's own suite of iLife apps could also be revealed for iOS at the iPad 2 launch.


The curtain was whipped off the first iPad in January last year, so we're expecting to see that familiar black polo neck make its way to the stage to tell us how magical an iPad with a camera is going to make our lives very soon indeed.


Source: http://www.techradar.com/

Hacker Shows How Cloud Could Wash Out Wireless Security

A hacker claims he's used Amazon's cloud services to bust open SHA-1, a wireless network security standard, and he says he'll be demonstrating his process at an upcoming Black Hat get-together. Malicious hackers could quickly set up brute-force attack systems using the cloud, but critics say real-world password cracks might not come so easily.


German hacker Thomas Roth's announcement that he used Amazon.com's cloud service to crack a wireless network security standard has left some security researchers scratching their heads. Others are merely shaking them in disbelief.


That attack was launched against the SHA-1 hash algorithm.


Roth's conclusions are that the SHA-1 algorithm is not fit for password hashing, and the compute power offered by cloud services makes it cheap and easy to launch brute-force attacks on passwords.


However, it's been known since 2005 that the SHA-1 algorithm has flaws, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology is seeking to replace it.


Also, undertaking a brute-force attack using the cloud can be costly.


"The cloud is certainly the fastest way to stand up many computers hammering on the same brute-force problem," Shawn Edmondson, director of product management for rPath, told TechNewsWorld."But that power doesn't come cheap."


Roth's Attack


Roth used a Cluster GPU instance from Amazon EC2. This has 22 GB of memory, two Intel Xeon X5570s using quad-core Nehalem architecture, two Nvidia Tesla Fermi M2050 GPUs and 1,690 GB of instance storage, Roth wrote in his blog.


It also offers a 64-bit platform and uses 10 gigabit Ethernet for "very high" I/O (input/output) performance, Roth said.


Using this platform, Roth claims he cracked all hashes from a file for passwords one to six characters long in 49 minutes.


However, Sophos security expert Paul Ducklin pointed out that Roth recovered 10 of 14 passwords on a challenge list while Ducklin recovered eight out of those 14 by merely using his MacBook Pro, running in the background, in the same time.


Further, Ducklin said that real-world password hashing schemes are more complex than the one used in the challenge list.


Ducklin added that the attack worked against very weak passwords used with a very weak password hashing system.


The System Roth Attacked


Roth reportedly claims that his attack can break wireless networks secured by applications using the WPA-PSK standard.


WPA stands for WiFi Protected Access. The WPA protocol implements the bulk of the IEEE 802.11i standard. However, it's not a strong protocol, as it was unveiled as an intermediate measure to replace the WEP protocol while 802.11i was being readied for release.


WEP, or Wired Equivalent Privacy, is a security algorithm for IEEE 802.11 wireless networks that was introduced as part of the original 802.11 protocol in 1997. It's relatively easy to crack and was superseded by WPA in 2003.


WPA has been replaced by WPA2, which requires testing and certification by the WiFi Alliance.


PSK stands for Pre-Shared Key Mode, which is also known as "Personal Mode." It's designed for home and small-office networks that don't require an 802.1x authentication server.


The Weakness of the Cloud?


Widespread criticism led Roth to subsequently point out that his real aim was to show how easy the new Amazon cloud cluster makes it to launch massively parallel attacks.


However, said rPath's Edmondson, "If you want to run 1,000 powerful servers 24/7 for a year on a hard computational problem, a roomful of blades is cheaper than public cloud time. So large-scale brute-force attacks still come down to resources and are well beyond the reach of most black-hat hackers. The cheapest and most illegal way is to use a black-market cloud -- namely, a botnet."


Roth told TechNewsWorld that he'll give a talk on his findings at the Black Hat conference, to be held in Washington, D.C., next week.


Clouds Can Strike Back Too


If such a hack using Amazon's cloud services did occur, the company would probably not be to blame because it would essentially be in the same position as a hotel owner if one of whose guests committed unlawful acts in his or her room.


But what can cloud service providers like Amazon do when people who rent their services do things they shouldn't?


"This poses a very interesting challenge for a public cloud provider, both in their acceptable use policy and in their self-policing," Edmonson said."But, as in the WikiLeaks example, Amazon is clearly willing to drop customers who break the policy."


Amazon kicked WikiLeaks off its servers after the site released sensitive diplomatic cables.


"Our terms of usage are clear, and we continually work to make sure the services aren't used for illegal activity," Amazon spokesperson Kay Kinton told TechNewsWorld."We take all claims of misuse of our services very seriously and investigate each one. When we find misuse, we take action quickly."


Searching for Security Salvation


Despite its flaws, SHA-1 is the most widely used SHA has function. Since then, some variants, like SHA-2, have been developed. However, they're too similar to SHA-1 algorithmically.


In 2007, NIST launched a competition to develop a new hash standard, SHA-3. The winner will be selected in 2012.


"SHA-3 is still in development," Richard Wang, manager of SophosLabs U.S., told TechNewsWorld. "NIST have not yet determined which of the candidate algorithms will become SHA-3."


Source: http://www.technewsworld.com

Android 2.3 Gingerbread Installed on iPhone 3G

Recently Google launched a much-improved version of Android, Android 2.3 aka Gingerbread, for android OS based phones and you will be surprised to read that almost all idevices can support it using some third-party apps like OpeniBoot.

iPhone 3G is the first device on which Android 2.3 (Gingerbread) has been installed successfully using the same OpeniBoot software.

Nick Pack, who managed to break into iOS to port Gingerbread to iPhone 3G, has also posted a video of iPhone 3G running on android 2.3. In the video it seems everything on iPhone 3G is working without any big problem or issue.

For those who don’t know OpeniBoot is an open source software based on iBoot that allows jailbreakers to insert their own code such as Linux kernel into iPhone/iPad.

OpeniBoot, currently, supports iPhone original, iPhone 3G and iPod Touch 1G but Nick Pack is also working to port the same hack into iPhone 4, however,  he didn’t mention any ETA yet.


Source: http://www.shoutpedia.com

Facebook Faces Loss of Its Privacy

Facebook has hit the big time, and that means the company that's famous for annoying users by compromising their privacy will have to swallow a bit of its own medicine. With investors expected to number more than 499 by the end of this year, Facebook will be forced to reveal its financial secrets to comply with SEC regulations and is likely headed for an initial public offering by mid-2012.




Top social network Facebook inadvertently revealed that it is preparing to go public with its financial data sometime in 2012. Facebook expects its investor population to exceed 499 this year, it reportedly states in a private placement document leaked to a number of media outlets from Goldman Sachs, which would compel it to disclose tons of financial information.


Per SEC rules, companies have to report financial data within 120 days of the end of the year they reach 500 investors.


Investor interest in Facebook has grown with stepped-up private trading by former employees and early investors on websites such as SharesPost and SecondMarket. On Monday, Goldman Sachs announced it made a US$500 million investment in Facebook, which pegged Facebook's value at $50 billion.


The leaked document -- hand-delivered to potential Goldman investors on Thursday -- reportedly reveals details about Facebook's earnings, its plans for an initial public offering (IPO) and the SEC's investigation of Facebook's total investor population.


One nifty jewel from the document: Facebook's net income for the first nine months of last year was $355 million.


Facebook did not respond to the E-Commerce Times' request for comments by press time.




Investor Frenzy for Social Networking


Facebook's value just last year was $10 billion. This mammoth increase in value over the past year gives it and its exclusive group of investors the incentive to go into public trading. The negative side of this is the reporting of revenue, profits or losses and executive compensation -- not to mention getting grilled on Wall Street.


Social networking companies have been receiving tons of investor interest recently. Information surfaced this week that LinkedIn, a business networking site, has begun talks with bankers about an impending IPO. Last month, Twitter recently received $200 million in investment dollars from the Silicon Valley venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.




What Does an IPO Mean for Facebook?


The growth in investors and a potential IPO could change the face of Facebook. "It means that Facebook and its investors want to take advantage of the amazing momentum the company has generated," Azita Arvani, principal of the Arvani Group, told the E-Commerce Times. "Social networking is hot, and Facebook is the king of that hot market right now. They can get a rich evaluation, and who knows what could happen later?"


Facebook's prominence and popularity dwarfs every other social site.


"Social networking sites such as LinkedIn will work hard to shine in the shadow of Facebook and get investments or seriously consider IPO options," said Arvani. "Let's hope it is not another bubble, because things are moving a bit too fast for logic to kick in."




No Privacy for Facebook


A Facebook IPO will have an impact on Facebook's freewheeling culture.


"What it means, bottom line, is more accountability -- more accountability to its investors, more accountability to its customers and to Wall Street, including the financial analysts," Laura DiDio, principal analyst at ITIC, told the E-Commerce Times.


"One of the reasons a company will stay private is so they don't have to open the kimono and reveal info about their financial dealings. Guess what -- there will be transparency," she added.


Facebook looks like a sound investment even in a tough economy.


"A Facebook IPO in 2012 is good timing," said DiDio. "They show no evidence of imploding."


That said, the company will have to dress itself up to walk with the major players.


"They have to manage their tremendous growth and popularity. There are been issues about privacy -- they will have to get a handle on it," said DiDio.


"As much of a wonderkid Zuckerberg is, he's still young and has things to learn. Going public will keep him more accountable. He will be in the big leagues -- like Steve Jobs, or Larry and Sergey at Google."


Source: http://www.ecommercetimes.com

Location-Based Services Are Becoming Social Network Outcasts

If you go on the Foursquare site, you'll learn that mayor of a certain location is supposed to be entitled to special services and discounts from that business. The problem is, in most cases, Foursquare has neglected to let the business owner in on the game -- meaning its badges and titles, no matter how lofty they sound, are completely worthless.



All the recent news about Facebook -- from its founder being named Time magazine's Person of the Year to Goldman Sachs placing a US$450 million bet on its future profitability -- makes it clear that social networking platforms are hot commodities.


It's also clear, however, that not all social networking platforms are created equal. So, while Facebook continues to attract hordes of new users and piles of cash from investment bankers, platforms such as Foursquare and Gowalla -- known generically as "location-based services" -- are living a lonelier existence.


Location-based services are still attracting a fair amount of media attention. What they aren't attracting is users -- at least not in any appreciable numbers when compared with the likes of Facebook and Twitter -- and this failure to connect with the masses could soon force location-based services into extinction.



Few Regular Users


To get an idea of how dire the situation is for these platforms, consider some numbers. To date, only 4 percent of Americans have used a location-based service, and only 1 percent use them as often as once a week, according to Forrester.


When they launched, location-based services promised to take social networking to the next level, by allowing users to "check in" at businesses they patronize frequently -- restaurants, coffee shops, stores, etc. Checking in is supposed to allow your online friends to know where you are, and perhaps entice them to join you for some real-world socializing. It's also supposed to give people a way of discovering exciting new places to shop and mingle by tracking where their friends are checking in.


That pitch earned these sites a good amount of media coverage and a fair number of early adopters. Now, however, the luster associated with location-based services is waning, and it's largely because that early vision of extending virtual social networks into the real world has not materialized.


In the final week of 2010 -- specifically from December 26 to January 2 -- the top 10 venues frequented by Foursquare users recorded a total of slightly more than 926,000 check-ins, according to Trendrr, a social media business intelligence service that compiles a weekly tally of Foursquare check-ins for publication on Advertising Age.


I contacted Matt Carmichael, director of information projects at Advertising Age, to confirm that the figures reflected check-ins across the entire country, and not just in selected metropolitan areas. When Carmichael said they were indeed national figures, my doubts about the future viability of location-based services deepened.



The Top 10 Foursquare Venues


The top 10 locations could muster only 926,000 check-ins for an entire week? Twitter records more than 65 million tweets every single day.


A quick look at the top 10 Foursqaure venues also blows holes in the theory that location-based services will help people find exciting new places to visit. Every venue on the list is a national chain -- starting with Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX), which recorded 146,865 check-ins for the week.


Barnes & Noble (NYSE: BKS) attracted 10,416 Foursquare enthusiasts to earn the 10th spot on the list. Sprinkled in between were Target, Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT), McDonald's (NYSE: MCD), the Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) Store, Best Buy (NYSE: BBY), Burger King, Costco (Nasdaq: COST) and Ikea.


It's easy to see why people aren't tossing aside their keyboards and rushing out to meet their friends at these places. It's also easy to see why even some people who describe themselves as avid social media users are questioning the value of location-based services.


"I'm a compulsive user of Foursquare, but I have to admit I'm not completely sure why I'm doing it," Neil McIntosh, editor of The Wall Street Journal's European website confessed while interviewing Dennis Crowley, a Foursquare cofounder.


Crowley responded that Foursquare, when used properly, could be considered the digital equivalent of a loyalty card, allowing users to earn discounts or free goods and services at businesses they patronize on a regular basis.


Badges and Titles Are Worthless


There's a major flaw in that theory, however, and it's one of several reasons I think Foursquare and its peers can't last for the long term -- at least not without making some major changes.


Foursquare's big shortcoming is this: It gives users badges for checking into particular venues a certain number of times. It even declares the Foursquare user who checks into a venue the most the "mayor" of that location.


If you go on the Foursquare site, you'll learn that mayor of a certain location is supposed to be entitled to special services and discounts from that business. The problem is, in most cases, Foursquare has neglected to let the business owner in on the game -- meaning its badges and titles, no matter how lofty they sound, are completely worthless.


I found myself literally laughing out loud while reading a recent letter to an advice column in Wired magazine in which a Foursquare user wanted to know if it was OK to ask the owner of a local cafe for some freebies after having "spent a fortune" to become mayor of that location.


The user was advised to tread lightly for fear of being transformed from "that nice guy who's always here to that pushy guy whose sense of entitlement deserves its own ZIP code."


If Foursquare operated its business properly, its users wouldn't have to fear being labeled at all. Foursquare would figure out a way to work out deals with merchants beforehand to ensure that its badges, titles, and whatever it decided to bestow on its members had some real value.


The Right Mix of Enticements


Carmichael, the Advertising Age project director, stated it another way: "Location-based services need to figure out the right mix of enticements for the users if they're going to achieve the kind of wide audience and habit-forming behavior needed to succeed. Simply sharing your whereabouts probably won't do it. Connecting consumers and savings will be the key."


This sounds like a fairly simple formula, and one that Crowley said Foursquare was starting to use. Still, there are two reasons it may be too late for this particular form of social networking to really catch on.


First, most technology trends can only support one or two major players. In the social networking realm, Facebook and Twitter already have captured those spots, with Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) and Apple looking like the most-likely candidates to move in if one of the top two should falter.


Second, Facebook and Twitter have started adding location-based features of their own, and Facebook in particular understands the dynamics of forming partnerships with businesses. That's a skill the operators of platforms like Foursquare and Gowalla have yet to locate -- and unless they do so quickly, they will find them banished from the circle of real social media players.


Source: http://www.technewsworld.com