Monday, April 13, 2009

Flash Mob

Zombie Flash Mob shuffles past Saks Fifth Avenue store

































Last week in class we talked about the flash mob. Many of you were new to the concept, and I was mentioning that I thought that the flash mob has grown up into something useful with the recent protests in Moldova. Is it possible that all of these new web tools have an infancy in which they are fun and interesting, but lack a larger social context or good. Do you think that other new, fun tools will grow into important pieces of our social fabric? Think of an example from the past where this has happened.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_mob

http://www.flashmob.com/

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

One Billion Reasons to Twitter

Rumor world is stirring about the possibility of Twitter being absorbed by Google. There are two interesting points in the article below. One is that Google's interest makes cute, neat things legitimate, and the second is that big Google puts the brakes on innovation when it absorbs companies. What are your thoughts? How do you gain legitimacy without losing your successful model? Is Twitter worth $1,000,000,000?

While rumors of an imminent Google acquisition of Twitter were apparently offbase, it wouldn't be surprising to see the companies strike up a formal collaboration or partnership.

google twitter acqusitionTwitter, a microblogging service in which millions of people post brief text messages, has emerged as the custodian of a valuable online index of real-time facts, comments, musings and announcements, information that is clearly valuable for Google's search engine index.

google twitter acqusitionGoogle routinely collaborates with major Web sites to determine the best way to crawl and index their content for its search engine, so sitting down with Twitter for that purpose would be consistent with its modus operandi.

"Twitter is clearly hot. The phenomenon of real time search and the ability to capture this stream of 'tweet' discussions is an important development in social media and search because people are trying to mine data for information that might otherwise be sought in a search engine," said industry analyst Greg Sterling from Sterling Market Intelligence in a phone interview. "This whole phenomenon Twitter represents is here to stay and needs to be addressed by search engines."

However, it's much less clear why Google would want to spend major-acquisition money on Twitter at this time. After all, Twitter doesn't represent anything close to a clear and present danger to Google in the search market. "Twitter exemplifies the category of real-time search, but it's not a Google killer," Sterling said.

In addition, Google, like most companies, is in cost-cutting mode and Twitter, while wildly popular, hasn't figured out a way to generate much revenue yet.

"There's a very interesting parallel between Twitter and YouTube. When Google bought YouTube, they did it because it was extremely popular, got tons of traffic and represented this new trend of video hosting and sharing. Now, Google still hasn't found a way to effectively monetize YouTube in a big way," said Allen Weiner, a Gartner analyst, in a phone interview. "Does Google really want to spend another huge amount of money on another extremely popular service that hasn't figured out a way to make money? I don't see it happening."

Others aren't so sure.

In an e-mail interview with IDG News Service, IDC analyst Karsten Weide said Google would gain "tremendous stickiness and traffic" from Twitter. "Microblogging is becoming an accepted new channel of online communications in addition to email and instant messaging, and it is here to stay," he said.

But he agreed that Google needs to know that it's highly likely Twitter will never make significant amounts of revenue. "That would mean -- just as Web mail -- it would be a loss leader that one cross-finances in order to have the indirect benefits," Weide said.

While Google doesn't need to boost its audience, the acquisition might keep Twitter out of the hands of competitors, namely Yahoo and Microsoft, he said. "I think an acquisition would make sense, and if they can get it for less than $1 billion, the better it is," Weide said.

Others believe Twitter should actively entertain the option of getting acquired by Google and strike while the iron is hot.

"Other tie-ins short of an acquisition could make sense, but would be harder to sustain since Twitter already uses such open interfaces. It will be hard to do something that others can't replicate. Now is the time for Twitter to sell. It is at the top of its hype range now. Monetizing on its own would be a long, hard slog," wrote Gartner research vice president Jeff Mann in a note e-mailed to reporters.

The rumors erupted late Thursday when tech blog TechCrunch reported the companies were engaged in "late stage negotiations" for an acquisition, citing two anonymous sources. TechCrunch later tempered that report, saying a third source characterized the discussions as "early stage" and possibly revolving around a search engine collaboration. On Friday, The Wall Street Journal's All Things Digital tech blog, also quoting anonymous sources, said no acquisition discussions were on the table, but rather talks about collaboration on real-time search and better crawling of Twitter's content.

It would be interesting to see what emerges from a collaboration between the companies to fine-tune Twitter's usefulness for search engine users, Sterling said.

"Right now, it's problematic using Twitter as an alternative search engine. There's a lot of noisy results you get on Twitter's search," Sterling said. "If you can remove some of the noise, it could be quite powerful."

For example, Twitter could turn into the next evolution of question-and-answer search engines, especially for users tapping into it from mobile devices, Sterling said. "It becomes a word-of-mouth network that is kind of instantaneous," he said.

That would complement all the different ways in which Twitter is already very useful, like for marketing, Sterling said.

There would be technical challenges in making Twitter into a more useful search engine, and it would involve Google coming up with a way to weigh the reliability and authority of different Twitter users, Weiner said.

While Google declined to comment, Twitter's co-founder Biz Stone posted a note on the company's official blog saying the company's plans are to remain independent.

"It should come as no surprise that Twitter engages in discussions with other companies regularly and on a variety of subjects," he wrote. "Our goal is to build a profitable, independent company and we're just getting started."

Stone also encouraged people to apply for jobs at the company, an interesting document to peruse for clues to Twitter's current plans and business and technology strategies.

Interestingly, Stone appeared on Stephen Colbert's "Colbert Nation" on Thursday evening, and during the interview he also said the Twitter's intention is to be a strong and independent company.

"We're recognizing a difference right now between profit and value. Right now, we're building value," Stone told Colbert.

That means extending Twitter globally, tapping not only into Web-based users but also into mobile phone networks, as well as adding features and refining the service, Stone said.

"When we get to a certain point where we feel we've gotten there, we'll begin experimenting with a revenue model. This isn't unlike the way Google approached their revenue model," he said. The revenue-model testing and experimentation will begin this year, but Twitter will take its time getting it right, Stone said.

Stone's comments may signal a potential tension with Twitter's financial backers, who have poured $55 million into the company. "Investors may agitate for an acquisition because the idea of an IPO is unlikely if not impossible," Sterling said.

Another issue that might derail a Google acquisition is that several Twitter staffers, including Stone and co-founder Evan Williams, already went through the experience of working for Google, after Google acquired Pyra Labs and its Blogger blog publishing service in 2003.

At the time, Blogger was the undisputed leader in the blog publishing space, but as part of Google its rate of innovation slowed down and competitors like Wordpress and Six Apart delivered more sophisticated services.

"Blogger was ahead of the curve when Google bought it and then it became the AOL of blogging platforms: an early leader that then lost ground," Sterling said.

If Google bought Twitter, the Twitter service would see some immediate improvements, Sterling said. Twitter posts would be incorporated into Google search results. Twitter's own search would be improved. Google would monetize Twitter with ads. But in the end, it could face Blogger's destiny.

"You might see Twitter maintain its current leader status for a while, but maybe not see if evolve as dynamically as it would under the stewardship of its founders," Sterling said.

It can't be encouraging that Google decided to stop actively developing Jaiku, a Twitter competitor Google acquired in 2007. Instead, Google has decided to port Jaiku to Google App Engine, and later to release the Jaiku engine as an open-source project under the Apache license.

The Jaiku service is maintained by volunteer Google engineers. Google also recently put mobile social-networking service Dodgeball out to pasture.

Other signs that would point against a Twitter acquisition are recent comments made by Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who called Twitter "a poor man's e-mail" and wondered whether it will remain a stand-alone service or become an e-mail feature. Schmidt has also said recently he doesn't foresee Google making major acquisitions in the immediate future.

Hype about Skype

Last week, we talked about the launch of the new Skype app for I-Phone. I had a feeling that it would be well received, but a million downloads already is huge. With this huge success story, there is always some push back. In this case, it is from AT&T who views Skype as a competitor, and it is refusing to allow Skype to fly free on its 3G Network. We have certainly entered a time when every application feels a sense of entitlement to work on everyone's platform i.e iTunes in Windows, but I think that I understand AT&T's point. We spent a lot of time building infrastructure to allow for our business model to work, and the nimble, little Skype isn't going to eat us. Does our global value structures of information, innovation, and speed allow for a company like AT&T to draw a line in the sand? Should AT&T play nice with everyone wanting to use their stuff?



FCC Asked to Investigate Skype for iPhone Restriction

Dan Moren, Macworld.com

Since its release on Tuesday, Skype for iPhone has been downloaded more than a million times -- that's a rate of six downloads a second, according to the company. All this despite the fact the software only works via the iPhone's Wi-Fi connection, and not AT&T's 3G network.

Artwork: Chip Taylor

That restriction has angered some, who have argued that the practice is anticompetitive. Those allegations have been turned up a notch now, as the Wall Street Journal reports that an Internet advocacy group called Free Press has asked the Federal Communications Commission to investigate whether or not the restriction is in violation of federal law.

Free Press bills itself as a nonpartisan organization concerned with media reform. In its open letter to the FCC (PDF link), it asks the government body to confirm that mobile wireless Internet access is subject to the same rules as traditional broadband Internet.

The letter cites the FCC's Internet Policy Statement (PDF link) which states that "consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice" in order to "preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet."

A USA Today article published earlier this week talked with an AT&T executive about the issue:

Jim Cicconi, AT&T's top public policy executive, says AT&T has "every right" not to promote the services of a wireless rival.

"We absolutely expect our vendors"--Apple, in this case--"not to facilitate the services of our competitors," he says.

"Skype is a competitor, just like Verizon or Sprint or T-Mobile," he says, adding, Skype "has no obligation to market AT&T services. Why should the reverse be true?"

Meanwhile, Apple has remained mum on the matter, though it's easy to see why the company might not want to get involved. After all, being able to use VoIP over AT&T's 3G network could help Apple sell more iPhones by providing another attractive feature--but, at the same time, Apple doesn't want to risk alienating their business partner.

The U.S. isn't the only place where VoIP restrictions are irking customers. T-Mobile, Apple's wireless partner in Germany, has said that not only will it prohibit use of VoIP applications on their 3G network, it'll also restrict its use on the company's Wi-Fi hot spot network and cancel the contract of any customers who try to work around the restriction.

In response, the Voice on the Net coalition, which includes Skype, as well as Microsoft and Intel, has asked the European Union to step in and enact policy that would protect consumers rights to choose what applications they can use.

How the FCC and EU proceed could have far-reaching implications not just for the future of VoIP, but in terms of what restrictions mobile operators can legitimately put on the use of their networks, which also may have impact on peer-to-peer programs, live video, and other services.

Death by Sexting















This is the sort of stuff that keeps me up at night. I can't believe the ordeal that this principal had to go through. In an era of anything goes on YouTube, it is no surprise that much of the criticisms and concerns about on-line video would reach mobile technology. As more of our information is received via mobile devices, sexting seems like a natural outcropping. Two questions...Should we try to regulate this? How can market pressures impact these types of moral atomic bombs?


Anti-sexting insanity out of control: False charges ruin vice principal

Posted by Richard Koman

The war against sexting has now reached absurd, outrageous, McCarthyite dimensions. I had thought this story about a prosecutor threatening prosecution of three girls for snapping pics of themselves in bras and a towel was bad enough.

But Kim Zetter’s story at Wired about the ordeal of Virginia vice-principal Ting-Yi Oei, who was assigned to check out rumors of rampant sexting at Freedom High School in South Riding.

Ironically, horribly, the assignment led to a Kafkaesque charge that Oei himself was a child pornographer. He spent $150,000 and year of his life clearing his name. Whether he can resurrect his career as an educator is yet to be seen.

“These charges are so toxic and incendiary,” says Diane Curling, a former teacher and Oei’s wife of 35 years. “Children need to be made aware of the dangers of sexting, but to intimidate public education officials and try to make it a felony to even touch something like this is terrifying. . . . If we are not careful, we will find ourselves with a new McCarthy era.”

Oei’s investigation led him to a 16-year-old boy who confessed to having a sext on his phone - a pic of a girl in panties but with her arms crossed across her chest.

Oei says he showed the image to his boss, Principal Christine Forester, who told him to preserve a copy on his office computer for the investigation. A computer neophyte, Oei didn’t know how to transfer the image from the boy’s cell phone, so the teen sent the picture to Oei’s phone, and told him how to forward it to his work e-mail address. When the process was complete, Oei instructed the student to delete the image from his phone.

Since the girl couldn’t be identified and was apparently not a student, Oei thought the matter was over. But when the boy was busted trying to pull a girl’s pants down and was given a 10-day suspension, the shit hit the fan when the boy’s mother learned of the photo incident. Oei refused to lift the suspension and the mom went to the cops.

Sheriff’s investigators came to the school, ostensibly to investigate the sexting issue. They helped the technologically-challenged Oei recover the photo from his cell phone and later determined the girl in the photo was a student at the school.

A month later, the first charges were filed against Oei: failure to report suspicion of child abuse, a misdemeanor. The charge alleged that Oei had a legal duty to report the girl’s photo to her parents, and to state agencies or law enforcement.

Of course, he hadn’t been able to identifiy the girl, so how would he alert her parents?

Loudoun County prosecutor James Plowman didn’t take that excuse and instead threatened Oei with a felony if he didn’t resign.

“We just feel very strongly that this is not someone who should be in the Loudoun County school system,” Plowman’s assistant explained to reporters. Oei refused, and on August 11, a grand jury indicted him for possession of child porn, a crime that carries a possible sentence of five years. The misdemeanor charge was dropped.

There were even more charges piled on. Read Kim’s story for the whole gory matter. But this week a judge put an end to the madness — and for Oei it must have felt like Joe McCarthy finally being silenced.

Last month, Oei’s defense attorney, Steven Stone, filed a motion to dismiss the charges on the grounds that the photo didn’t constitute child pornography. In a ruling on Tuesday, Loudoun Circuit Court Judge Thomas Horne agreed. Citing a long history of state appeals court decisions, Horne noted that nudity alone is not enough to qualify an image as child pornography. The image must be “sexually explicit” and “lewd.”

“As a matter of law, the photograph does not meet the requirements established by our appellate courts and the felony charge will be dismissed,” the judge wrote. “[T]he two misdemeanor counts will be dismissed as well.”

The prosecutor is unrepentant.

“The issue of whether it meets the definition under the statute … goes to whether it is lewd,” he says. “This one I felt was [lewd] because of the focus of the picture, which was the private areas … and the provocative pose she was in. The judge felt it didn’t meet the precedent case law for child pornography, but it was apparently provocative enough of a photograph that he saw fit that it should be sealed.”

Oei should have resigned, Plowman insisted.

“I thought that was a just and appropriate sanction for his behavior,” he says. “But he was unwilling to be responsible for any kind of accountability for what he did.”

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Sort of Creepy and Cool

I found this blog post on www.insidefacebook.com. This is an incredible site. I never would have imagined the depth and breath of this site. Let me know your thoughts about the article.

photo finderFace.com has released a new Facebook application calledPhoto Finder that lets users find photos of themselves or friends through facial recognition.

Here’s how it works: When you log into Photo Finder, the app uses its facial recognition technology to search for untagged pictures of you or your friends throughout Facebook by scanning all the public photos in your network. When it finds photos, it suggests tags based strictly on the faces identified. This could lead to less embarrassing pictures floating about without your knowledge. So far, it seems to work pretty well.

Face.com, based in Tel Aviv and New York, apparently built the Facebook app as a technology demonstration. The company is angel funded and currently raising an A round. While it’s still in closed beta, the first 100 Inside Facebook users who click on this link will be able to try the app out.

Social Gaming and Living Social

As I dig further into the world of Facebook, I am presented with more and more apps. I guess that we have finally found a way to make a business out of Facebook. The apps are the things that people will purchase for their phones or Facebook that add functionality and fun. Here are a couple of links to information about popular apps on Facebook. Shouldn't Facebook be charging for these apps to be present on their platform? What apps are you using? What is the most useful? What type of apps do you wish that you had? Do you have next great idea? Do you want to share it?

http://livingsocial.com/

http://livingsocial.com/about

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/31/BU5GVSA3F.DTL

Can Facebook be Everything for Everybody?

The recent new look Facebook page has come under fire by many. It has been interesting to watch Facebook try to be responsive to its users demands. It brings me to think though whether Facebook has any core principals or whether it will choose the being everything to everybody model that often fatigues an organization. If you could be the CEO of Facebook, what would your core principals be?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2009/03/facebook_readies_a_facelift.html?wprss=fasterforward