So what kind of sharing are you signing up for if you connect to Facebook and NYTimes.com? From the opt-in screen:
—Name, profile picture, gender, networks, user ID, list of friends, and any other information you’ve shared with everyone.
—E-mail permission (of course, NYTimes.com already has an email address if you’re a registered user but this one has a better shot at being real.) —The Times may post status messages, notes, photos, and videos on your Wall —Access News Feed posts —Access your data at any time even when you’re not logged in. —Access friend lists —Access profile information: likes, music, TV, movies, books, quotes, About Me, interests, groups, birthday, education history and work history —Access contact info including hometown, current city and website.
Facebook privacy settings govern what’s visible to others but don’t appear to control the access being granted to NYTimes.com. In the FAQ, the site explains: “Once you have authorized The Times to store select personal data, we may use a subset of that data in the TimesPeople API, which allows developers to use NYTimes.com public activity in their applications.” No real clue yet what that means.
I’m a member of the Napster generation. Unique circumstances back then helped MP3 to become almost a universally accepted format across operating systems and devices seemingly overnight (whereby ‘seemingly overnight’ I mean ‘ok, fine, maybe it took around 1-3 years’). Flash sort of became the MP3 for video, but only on the Mac and PC—Adobe mostly gave mobile devices the middle finger until Apple published Flash’s obituary.
Why it’s taken the video industry so long to pull its head out of… somewhere, and create an ‘MP3 for video’ is far, far beyond me.
Interview: How do you measure the seemingly unmeasurable? Evidently, there is some precedent.
"In debates about online privacy, one question always seems to crop up: What’s the harm? How can harm come from a breach of privacy if there’s no fraud and the information isn’t used for, say, identity theft? When the only thing that seems to be wrong is a feeling of “creepiness,” what should that be called?
Ryan Calo, senior research fellow at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford University Law School, has been trying to answer that question. This summer, he released a draft of a paper titled the Boundaries of Privacy Harm that is set to be published in the Indiana Law Journal next year.”
“Thou must be true to thyself and others
Thou shalt not claim the tweets of other as your own
Honor thy followers and those that follow thee
Thou shalt not re-tweet without reading content
Thou shalt express gratitude to all those that praise thee
Thou shalt not suffice by re-tweets and @replies, thou must add unique content
Thou shalt not follow thy neighbor only to profit, but to engage and learn
Thou shalt not Auto-follow, Auto-reply, Auto-DM, Auto anything.
Thou shalt not act like a bot
Thou shalt not spread rumors”—Twitter – The 10 Commandments
"When researchers found an unusual linkage between solar flares and the inner life of radioactive elements on Earth, it touched off a scientific detective investigation that could end up…rewriting some of the assumptions of physics."
Either solar neutrinos or a new unknown particle is having an affect on radioactive decay rates, causing them to be variable instead of constant.
Henning says that polyphenols in tea start breaking down after the tea is brewed. So if a bottle has been sitting on the shelf for a while, there may be only a little — if any — antioxidants in the tea. Such small amounts, says Henning, won’t provide any of thehealth benefits associated with tea. Plus, many tea beverages have just as much sugar as soda.
To get the most out of your tea, Henning suggests brewing a fresh batch in the morning and drinking the tea throughout the day. After 24 hours, she says, the tea should be chucked. Green tea extract is another good option, she says.
Google Android began with the greatest of intentions — freedom, openness, and quality software for all. However, freedom always comes with price, and often results in unintended consequences. With Android, one of the most important of those unintended consequences is now becoming clear as Google gets increasingly pragmatic about the smartphone market and less and less tied to its original ideals.
Here’s the dirty little secret about Android: After all the work Apple did to get AT&T to relinquish device control for the iPhone and all the great efforts Google made to get the FCC and the U.S. telecoms to agree to open access rules as part of the 700 MHz auction, Android is taking all of those gains and handing the power back to the telecoms. […]
The consequence of not putting any walls around your product is that both the good guys and the bad guys can do anything they want with it. And for Android, that means that it’s being manipulated, modified, and maimed by companies that care more about preserving their old business models than empowering people with the next great wave of computing devices.
Read the full article by clicking the title link above.
It was a primitive trip with a sophisticated goal: to understand how heavy use of digital devices and other technology changes how we think and behave, and how a retreat into nature might reverse those effects.
Cellphones do not work here, e-mail is inaccessible and laptops have been left behind. It is a trip into the heart of silence — increasingly rare now that people can get online even in far-flung vacation spots.
What is this digital life doing to my brain? Fascinating article, especially since I just went without my cellphone for about a week.
OK, so this headline comes from experiments with mice, not humans. But even so, I am very glad someone is taking traditional and “natural” remedies serious enough to determine which ones are beneficial, harmful, or harmless placebos.
I agree with the premise of this article, that the best traditional ads in magazines work because they “extend content” instead of disrupt it the way ads on the Internet do. This is one reason I hate targeted ads online. Because they are so creepy, they are even MORE disruptive than non-targeted online ads.
Click on the title link to read the entire article with demo graphics.