For those who don’t feel connected enough through a variety of social networking sites, Google is introducing Friend Connect, a program designed to connect connectors, increase site traffic, and piss off Facebook. The Facebook team initially blocked Google from accessing their site, noting that Friend Connect might violate their privacy regulations. Depending on your perspective—if, for example, you’re not a Facebook executive—you may be inclined to find their objection to be less about privacy and more about control. And by “control” I mean money. Who, save Googlites, wants a bigger portion of the Internet controlled by Google?
More or less recognizing that privacy was not the main concern, Mark Zuckerberg backed off from the hostile reaction, noting that it was so not a big deal. And perhaps, he said, Google and Facebook could work something out, ideally involving Facebook making money.
I propose they solve the problem with Silicon Valley Ultimate Frisbee. (Note: This is a real thing.) What was once an innocent game where Apple could play Google and Yahoo could play Facebook would be far more competitive and productive with a bit of capitalism thrown in. You won’t see any cherry pickers on the field if the players’ livelihoods depend on catching a Frisbee.
In hopes of gaining on Google's vast lead in advertising revenue, Microsoft is introducing into its Live Search a cashback program in which you, the consumer, are paid to search. Of course, another way to think about it is "not paid to search." Instead you'll have access to deals, which might maybe just possibly perhaps save you 30% on products. Presumably that's off the ticket price, though no one in his right mind pays the ticket price for things on the Internet.
But will the program, as Microsoft hopes, improve loyalty to their search engine? Personally, I'm loyal to nothing online, save my own vanity projects and LOLcats. And those are still negotiable. (I mean, what if someone starts a site with even cuter kitties?) Plus Google is just better.
That said, who am I to judge large corporations that want to give me money, even if give means "give"?
Nintendo released its much promoted "Wii Fit," which encourages you to engage in such activities as Nintendo push-ups. They're similar to real push-ups, but with the added bonus of looking at a television screen. In fact, thanks to the game, you'll have the option of looking at a television screen during a whole variety of exercises, including aerobics, strength training, and of course, hula hooping. Not having used the Wii or its fitness program, I feel compelled to quote from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune review:
"Sure, exercise is good for you. The only problem for many people is the part where you have to get up and actually move around. But what if you could turn the activity into a fun game?"
Yes, imagine that. Making a game out of exercise. Who would've thought?
Nintendo. That's who.
In more news of things that will KILL YOUR CHILDREN, we have people who do, in fact, kill your children. Long after Megan Meier committed suicide, the woman (and mother) who goaded her into it has been indicted. The woman had set up a profile on MySpace, creating herself in the image of a teenage boy, who would crush on and subsequently crush a young girl already suffering from depression. Any proposals for how we take care of those predators, New York?
Meanwhile, Canadian officials have requested that MySpace remove the profile of Clifford Olson, a far more vicious child killer, who somehow managed to get photos on the site even though he’s in prison. Fun quotation from the article: “On the page, Olson says he’d like to meet Jesus Christ, Pamela Anderson and Britney Spears.”
Perhaps Amy Winehouse should try blogging. It seems that blogs, once thought to be the domain of post-modern narcissists such as myself, is actually a form of group therapy. Of course, therapists stress that blogging is a supplemental activity and not a replacement for paying your therapist. In addition to the emotional benefits long associated with writing, at least one study suggests that the activity can also expediate the healing of physical wounds. (No word yet on whether writing cures drug addictions, though James Frey seems to have gotten past his own personal struggles, such as not being a millionaire.)
Also notable is the news that women are more likely to receive these therapeutic benefits because they write about mushy things—their personal lives for example. Meanwhile, men are more inclined to write about topics like politics and technology because we're eager to point out that we have accurate opinions about everything. I did a quick, unscientific study of the iggli blogs, which largely confirms the theory. (See? I'm right!)
Cubans can now add televisions to the list of things they're allowed to buy but can't because they cost 40 times their monthly salary. Even with computers, though, most Cubans won't be able to access the Internet, which is too bad because they'll be missing out on important world news and information like LOLcats.
LOLcats and its contemporaries in the meme world (e.g. that guy who traded a paperclip for a house) constituted a discussion point at ROFLCon, an MIT conference on Internet culture. The question: How do you create a meme, thus becoming a famous millionaire? The answer: No one knows. If I did, I would surely be doing something else right now.
It would have been no surprise to me if women’s rights groups had been up in arms over Grand Theft Auto IV; the ad for GTA VI featured a busty woman whose clothing seemed to be falling off while she seductively sucked on a lollypop. Somewhere in the background was a car. Those same groups were concerned about GTA III, after all, when it became clear that young men just might learn to objectify women by (virtually) having sex with them, then subsequently beating them to death and stealing their money. Yet NOW hasn’t taken a particularly harsh line this time. To quote their spokeswoman, Mai Shiozaki:
“We would really like to see the actual game before we comment on it. But it’s not like we’re going to go out and buy it.”
This time it’s MADD who’s upset. Because even though the game is way awesome and those of us who haven’t played it couldn’t possibly understand, MADD doesn’t like the part where you can stumble out of a bar, stumble into a car, and stumble over the bloody bodies you run over.
Rockstar Games, of course, defends GTA IV, noting that the character’s actions are not without consequences. (“Do the crime, do the time.”) But—never having played the game—how much “time” can you reasonably do? I don’t imagine the video game would, for example, insist that you spend a few days staring at the screen as Niko, your villain-as-hero, stares at the bars of his cell. Then again, perhaps a prison is an equally good setting for themes of rape, theft, and abuse. (Might Niko learn his lesson there?)
The newest crime-fighting superheroes are—as you’ve no doubt already guessed—Facebook users. Gone are the days when your family and friends can accuse you of wasting time trolling through profiles; because you are, of course, working hard to bring criminals to justice.
How exactly are you doing this? Well, if you happen to live in Manchester, then your local police department has developed a Facebook application allowing you to easily submit information about crimes. (Added bonus: If your roommate is always doing irritating little things around the house, and traditional discussion just hasn’t gotten through to her, you could teach her a lesson by discretely accusing her of, say, homicide. Then as she’s being handcuffed and thrown into the back of the police car, you knowingly shout, “Next time maybe you should remember to buy toilet paper!”)
The online community has already proven itself a worthy crime-fighting force in Canada, where otherwise mild-mannered Canadian forum participants have been aggressively catching car thieves. In the most recent instance, a man took a Nissan Skyline GT-R for a test drive and never came back. He was a nondescript white male, except that he was short and fat and had two missing fingers. The dealer posted a notice on beyond.ca, and the thief was caught shortly after a forum moderator saw a suspect vehicle and took a photo of the driver—who, of course, was missing two fingers. (In another case, forum participants matched a car thief to his Facebook profile.)
And if you’re feeling especially ambitious you can work on solving crimes against humanity. The War Crimes Watch List is hoping Facebook users can spot Ahmed Haroun and Ali Muhammad Ali Abd al-Rahman, two of the men responsible for that whole genocide business in Darfur. Go get ‘em, Facebook!
For the low price of $278 million, Apple has acquired PA Semi, a “boutique designer of semiconductors.” What makes a microchip boutique-worthy? Tech blogger John Paczkowski notes that it had a “rock-star design team.” Plus the chips are, in fact, super-efficient. And if you take a look at the company’s own image of the chip, it appears to be flying out of a Christmas tree.
Why Apple felt compelled to purchase a designer chip, especially when they had a close relationship with Intel, is a matter of debate. Laying claim to the “greenest” semiconductor available is certainly appealing. But I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the chip will be cited as one more reason for Apple users to feel better than everyone else. A recent Neilson study shows that they (well, we) “generally see themselves as open-minded, socially liberal, and 46 percent more assured of their own superiority than PC users.”
At Stanford University, Professor BJ Fogg is teaching a class on the Facebook phenomenon, where we learn that the social networking site’s success—as I’ve noted before—is due to the brilliant formula of getting participants to do all the work for you. But apparently those sites have also tapped deeper into our psyche, playing into “our need to be socially accepted.” This online peer pressure, evidently, explains our choice of profile pictures, which we use to present some distinct trait about us. Students in Fogg’s class wanted to be perceived as “fun,” “outgoing,” or a “world traveler.” Notably absent from the list of descriptors was “employable,” an increasing concern for those who realize anyone from the general public can view profile photos.
Anyway, it’s Earth Day, so you’re probably wondering to yourself, “What are extraordinarily wealthy people doing to reduce their carbon footprint and help save the Earth?” Why, they’re building “eco-friendly” mansions, of course!
For the less wealthy, it’s back to Facebook, where Toyota and the Arbor Day Foundation have combined forces to create a new application, allowing you to plant a tree for $1.
And just to add another link, check out TIME Magazine’s list of the best eco-oriented websites.
As the pope meets with victims of priests and the Supreme Court battles with child rapists, Google is taking down child pornography. By developing pattern recognition technology, the company aims to rid the web of child exploitation. This comes along with today’s news that Google is in a much better fiscal position than Wall Street predicted. Coincidence? Probably. But then again, maybe some good deeds are rewarded with, say, $5.19 billion.
Yahoo has not been so fortunate. Its good deed, back in 2000, was helping a then-struggling search engine: Google. After supporting and promoting the up-and-coming company, poor, trusting Yahoo finds itself eight years later desperately trying to keep up, but likely to be eaten by Steve Ballmer.
In a bizarre lawsuit one of Mark Zuckerberg’s former classmates, Aaron Greenspan, is suing over the Facebook trademark—not because Greenspan coined it himself (the term has evidently been used at Harvard for decades), but because Greenspan wants to use it in the title of his memoirs. Setting aside my reservations about 25-year-olds writing memoirs, I’m not convinced the title—Authoritas: One Student’s Harvard Admissions and the Founding of the Facebook Era—is really exciting enough to warrant a lawsuit. More likely, the lawsuit is a handy means of publicity when no one reputable will publish your book. (Then again, perhaps I’m too cynical. If I wrote a 335 page book largely motivated by bitterness that my idea for a social networking site was stolen and subsequently made billions of dollars, I might want to include the site’s name as well.)
While Zuckerberg and Greenspan rekindle their relationship, we learn from CNNU about the importance of Facebook in determining modern relationships. It boils down to this: If it’s not on Facebook, it isn’t real. Nothing new there. But I will direct your attention to the best quotation of the article, from a UNC Chapel Hill student:
“Guys won’t try to come get with a girl in a relationship, and girls won’t come to get with a guy. It’s like marking your territory.”
I’ve always associated that phrase with urination, generally the canine variety, but in the hopes that it might catch on, I’d like to officially coin the term “digital piss.” (Also, “e-piss.”) If you want to use it in your book title, you’ll have to sue me. Monetary compensation would be acceptable as well.
And finally, it turns out that those relationship status updates are so important that we can’t work without them. A new study in Australia shows that half the people who visit social networking sites during work hours would refuse to accept a job if the employer banned Facebook and MySpace. Given that the Chinese are closing in on American productivity, this might be a good time for MySpace to infiltrate Asia. (Oh wait. It is.)
For all the technological savvy of Generation Y (a.k.a. the Echo Boomers), the older folks seem to have a leg up on at least one principle: The Internet is creepy. As the Federal Trade Commission finishes its discussion on online privacy and regulations, major players have voiced their thoughts on behavioral advertising, the process where advertisers track your web browsing history and tailor ads just for you.
Advertiser View: Isn’t that thoughtful of us? We’re saving you time by getting rid of all those ads you wouldn’t have clicked on anyway.
Capitalist View: Targeted advertising is the price you pay for otherwise free services, such as search engines and email accounts.
Some Guy in Illinois View: Most people would rather pay to visit websites than face the barrage of advertisements reminding us that our privacy is consistently being invaded.
Most People’s View: No, we probably wouldn’t.
Google View: We’re in favor of privacy, but let’s define behavioral advertising (more narrowly) before we pass judgments.
Microsoft View: Don’t trust Google! We’re the real advocates of privacy.
Mashable View: Well, sort of.
In today's news on technology that will KILL YOU, the New York Times reported on an epidemic of bloggers dropping dead. The story, placed on the front page of the Sunday Times, was swiftly criticized by approximately every writer on the Internet, noting that the author only provides two examples of bloggers dying. At that rate writing remains one of the safest professions in the country, right in between basket weaving and sleeping. (Many of the critics are quick to point out that they do work really hard.)
In spite of the article’s shortcomings, the theory strikes me as entirely plausible. Somewhere in between thinking of a blogging topic, eating lunch, and taking a nap, I came down with quite a case of the sniffles. Given that I’m not forced to interact with other people, I have only my strenuous writing career to blame.
