Facebook Apology Misses the Point

So, Facebook has taken it upon itself to police identities and decide who is real and who is not allowed to exist. Yes, they only have domain over their social sphere but with Facebook being THE defining social media platform of our era, it's a huge handicap to be excluded from it.

Summary of the worrying news (along with my commentary):

Facebook's Chief Product Officer Chris Cox, defends the name policy that "affected" our LGBT community. Yes, we've been "affected" by their uneven enforcement of the policy that bans names they deem unreal or "not real enough." Facebook chose to support those who report non-gender-conforming accounts, or people who report someone's account as unreal in response to them not liking what their opponent said in an online debate. Meanwhile, plenty of fake-named accounts that look like everyday gender-conforming men and women and don't post controversial topics will never get banned from this policy.

Cox stood by the original "real name" policy — which Facebook says is not synonymous with requiring "legal" names. He said the rule helps Facebook stand out amid all the anonymity online and helps keep users safe from anonymous cyberbullying.

"With this input, we're already underway building better tools for "authenticating" the Sister Romas of the world while not opening up Facebook to bad actors." (Sister Roma is the famous Drag Queen shown above. When her Facebook account was threatened, she got her friend San Francisco City Supervisor David Campos to complain to Facebook, which is probably the only reason Facebook is even pretending to listen to the queer community on this issue.)

You heard it here first, folks. The way Facebook enforces their new name policy is meant to KEEP USERS SAFE FROM BULLYING.

It's not like any of us use aliases to protect ourselves from bullying, right? It's not like any women, transgender people or LGBQ folk have ever been threatened over something we published on the internet. It's especially not like people like Anita Sarkeesian are all over the news for exactly this sort of trouble.

Meanwhile, Ello is gaining 4,000 users per hour...

Snapchat: Live your Life in Real Time

Snapchat is trying to bring social media to a healthier place:

"The social media profile attempts to convince us that life, in all its ephemeral flow, should also be its simulation; the ephemeral flow of lived experience is to be hacked into a collection of separate, discrete, objects to be shoved into the profile containers. The logic of the profile is that life should be captured, preserved, and put behind glass. It asks us to be collectors of our lives, to create a museum of our self. Moments are chunked off, put in a grid, quantified, and ranked. Permanent social media are based on such profiles, with each being more or less constraining and grid-like. Rethinking permanence means rethinking this kind of social media profile, and it introduces the possibility of a profile not as a collection preserved behind glass but something more living, fluid, and always changing."

First becoming popular in September, CNN already predicts Snapchat is here to stay.

How the USA Shutdown Killed Science

An anonymous scientist talking to Wired tells us how shutting down the United States government even for 1 day destroys most live biomedical research experiments:

"Scientists are hardworking people. They work long hours, on weekends, and they do that because it’s necessary. The schedules they follow aren’t like an industrial plant’s. If you interrupt them, they can’t pick up and start again. It’s an enormous waste of money and resources to interrupt this and have it abandoned."

Then he goes on to talk about "mercy killing"  their lab animals and it gets a bit creepy, but he ends with this gem:

"It’s ironic that factions with names like Tea Party and Patriot engage in anti-American behavior: shutting down the government because they don’t agree with a vote passed by the majority."

Ironic?  I'm not sure that's the right word.

CISPA Ends Internet Privacy in USA

Passed just last April: "CISPA is an extreme proposal that allows companies that hold our very sensitive information to share it with any company or government entity they choose, even directly with military agencies like the NSA, without first stripping out personally identifiable information," said Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel at the ACLU's Washington Legislative Office.

House Representative Alan Grayson (Florida), tried to introduce a tiny amendment to make sure a warrant was required before companies had to hand over info. But "The Rules Committee wouldn’t even allow debate on requiring a warrant before a search."

Why would the House rush through such a controversial bill?  Well, interest groups in support of the bill spent $605 MILLION DOLLARS lobbying Congress since 2011. That's 140 times as much as those who opposed the bill, who only spent $4.3m!  Why count since 2011?  Well that's when lobbying was allowed to get bigger than ever, because Citizens United vs. FCC had just taken off.  (The ironically named Citizens United* was a conservative group who sued the Federal Election Comission to allow corporations political "rights" to bribe--I mean, lobby--Congress unlimited amounts of money for the first time in US history.)

* ironic because it should have been named Corporations United.

Galactic Internet is Here!

Finally, you will be able to Tweet or Facebook to someone in outer space. But they won't be real aliens, only rich snobs on Virgin Galactic's new space ship cruise.

SpaceShipTwo is a luxury tourist space flight, costing $200,000 a head. It doesn't go anywhere, only circles in deep space for "a few minutes" before returning to Earth. Some passengers may want to spend this time gazing intently at the wonders of outer space, making a $200,000 memory that will last forever. But I guess some other tourists just need to tweet live about how "shooting star meteorite so COOL OMG!"

CAPTCHA Ads Create Zombies

Solve Media has created an advertising method that makes life easier--ads that actually save time as you view them. Remember those annoying CAPTCHA checks on the internet? You click to submit something, and out of nowhere there's a fuzzy mess of alphabet soup saying you must copy ALL the letters EXACTLY, to prove that you're a human being? Well, you're not the only one who has trouble with those. Solve Media thinks that web users would rather copy a brand logo instead of garbled text--and so far 650,000 clicks a day are proving them right.

These captcha ads can be completed twice as fast as the traditional captcha, and they're a lot less stressful. With corporate CAPTCHA, the days of squinting and puzzling through Salvadore Dali scrabble-puke are over!

So now, unlimited posting is only a few slogans away. To prove you're a real human, you'll ironically have to act like a consumer zombie. Mindlessly quote the corporate motto in front of you, and you'll be able to pass safety checks online. As an added bonus, you'll remember the logos without even trying! By requiring you to read and repeat their message, the CAPTCHA slogans implant themselves in your memory 12 times deeper than a regular banner ad. With interactive learning technology this strong, we could be teaching people all kinds of useful facts.

Instead, our information overload may cause the first real consumer zombies; sleepwalkers who stumble out of bed murmuring "There's nothing like a Dr.Pepper...RRRGH," while they roam the dark night, searching for a can of soda.

Don't Post that Video!

Don't share a copyrighted video on your site, because now you can get arrested. Brian McCarthy is a 32-year-old Texan who ran channelsurfing.net until he was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement last week. Channelsurfing.net let users watch videos that were not supposed to be free, including sports and pay-per-view events. By embedding these videos on his site, Brian only linked to someone else's copy of the vid, he did not possess the file anywhere on his web space. He did allow users to watch pirated videos without leaving his website. Brian made $90,000+ a year from advertisers on his site.

By doing this, Brian managed to upset the UFC, WWE, NFL, NBA, and NHL who were supposed to be charging to broadcast these events. He now faces up to 5 years in prison.

Should Brian be going to jail? Copyright infringement is normally a civil offense, NOT criminal. But Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is claiming it's criminal this time because Brian profited off the distribution of illegal content. This is a stretch in the power of ICE, because no one has been arrested who didn't actually host pirated content before.

Now, what Brian did at channelsurfing.net is something like building a house with windows where you can look out and see something illegal. He then let people into this house for free and encouraged them to watch the illegal goings-on, while making a profit from advertisements in the house. He is only the secondary offender and has not created the illegal content himself. Really, Brian's crime is promoting free information while finding another way to make a profit. And now ICE says that is a criminal offense.

If Brian goes to jail, its likely more people will get arrested or fined for embedding copyrighted videos on their site. Techdirt.com writes, "it should worry almost anyone who has a website and has ever embedded videos. I have, for example, frequently embedded YouTube videos on this site -- and some of those videos might have been infringing. On top of that, I make some money from advertising on this site. Does that mean I now face criminal liability? I certainly hope not, but that seems to be the incredibly chilling message that ICE is sending. It immediately makes me question if I can ever embed another video without first getting explicit permission from the copyright holder."

While we all laugh at the fact that "ICE" is "chilling," let's think about this. The internet makes it very easy to share information. Do we want to change that by arresting people for sharing certain kinds of information? Internet censorship is already on the rise. Countries and schools can block any site deemed offensive or inappropriate. If we don't stop censorship at some point, how soon until we are all forced to "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil?"

RIP Net Neutrality

The tiered web access deal being plotted by Verizon and Google is bad news for all internet users.

Yes, of course it's bad news for the freedom loving hippies who will complain about the loss of net neutrality and the fact that their web content is now being censored.

But, did you know its also bad news for God-loving Americans? Three years ago, Associated Press showed that similar web filtering was used by Comcast to BLOCK ACCESS TO THE BIBLE online.

Well, I guess we can always look to the upcoming Free Internet to save us all. Oh wait, the FCC decided to block that too. Despite support from over 70,000 people and "300 local, state and federal officials from all 50 states," the FCC decided granting ad-supported free Wireless internet to the public was "not the best policy outcome." What could be a better policy outcome? Well, right now the FCC is planning to auction this extra bandwith (known as the AWS-3 bandwith) to already existing service providers to "bring additional spectrum to market so the wireless ecosystem can continue to provide our consumers with the most innovative industry in the world."

Now I'm not really sure but I thought the words auction, market, consumer and industry were not supposed to be what motivates a federal agency. But maybe the concept of public good is something that will die out along with the uncensored internet.

Problems with TSA Body Scanners

Unless you like the idea of showing your junk to the US Government every time you fly, you're probably unhappy with the new "Naked Body Scanners" and "Enhanced" pat downs. Or maybe you have no idea what I'm talking about. Either way, you should read this:

1. The backscatter x-ray technology used by the US produces a detailed, graphic outline of your body parts. A less invasive option would have been the ProVision ATD radio scanners used in Amsterdamn, which do not produce images of passenger bodies, only items found on the body. Why don't we use these now? Well, TSA Administrator John Pistole's answer is that

"these “blob” machines, as opposed to the “naked” machines, are the “next generation” of screening technology. His concern, he said, is that “there are currently a high rate of false positives on that technology, so we’re working through that.”"

I would take a false positive over my naked body being printed in an image any day. But at least the images aren't being saved, right? Think again...

2. All US scanners machines have the capacity to save your body scans and some of them ALREADY HAVE. Last August, a Florida courthouse using the machines admitted to saving "tens of thousands of images recorded with a millimeter wave system." But don't worry, TSA spokeswoman Sari Koshetz assures us that "the agency's scanners are delivered to airports with the image recording functions turned off." And since turning that function on would be against the rules, its not like anyone would ever do that.

Well, at least all these scans are going to keep us safe, right? Sorry, wrong again..

3. The new body scanners let many dangerous objects through. Adam Savage of Mythbusters recently passed through with 2 12-inch STEEL RAZORBLADES in his jacket pocket. The scanners also miss any items below the skin or in body cavities, and cannot detect "plastics or ceramics used in bomb-making."

So, if body scanners can't protect us, what should we do? Should we submit everyone to an enhanced pat down and cavity search? That doesn't sound very fun or time-effective. Instead, FOX NEWS has an idea: profiling. "We have limited resources; why don't we use them on the 19-year-old Yemeni exchange student and not the 90-year-old grandmother or the nun who's been at the same convent for 50 years?" Hmmmm. This does seem like a time-saver, and you know who else uses this strategy? Israeli Airports.

Tweet Tweet! You're Busted

Twitter now allows you to add a location to your tweets. The problem? It auto-tracks your location and inputs straight from your IP address.

So you don't actually have to type in anything, it just broadcasts your city wherever you go, until you turn it off. Sounds really easy-to-use...most likely too easy. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. Example 1: Last year's GPS fail, that guy who lost his job by forgetting his GPS was auto-broadcasting.

Example 2: People often tweet from their phones when they are out partying, goofing off and maybe even *gasp* intoxicated! Does this sound like a good time to be letting the world wide web know exactly where you are? Now even a vague message like "Lady Gaga is sooooo good!" can prove to your parents/friend/boyfriend that you weren't home studying, if the location shows you left town. Gosh forbid if they get a more exact tracker that gives your address, because then everyone will know exactly which gay* club you hang out at that plays Lady Gaga.

*I use this term in the most friendly way. Lady Gaga is both gay and quality, as many other things can be.

Beeware of Cellphones

Researchers in India recently found that cellphones can be pretty bad for bees...

See, bees navigate like little compasses, using magnetite in their body to tell direction. Cellphone radiation ruins their compass! Beehives exposed to radiation lost all ability to produce honey, and hives ran out of food in three months.
i.e. Bees starving!

Queens also stopped laying eggs by 50%. So, less baby bees!

Gosh, this all sounds really tragic. But, is it enough to get people to stop using their cellphones...?

Maybe people need to know that bees are crucial to agriculture and food production. Or maybe, the bees just need a new spokesperson like the girl at right...

If girls in lingerie can't save the bees, who can?

Cell-ebrity Author makes $600k at 15 yrs

And my teachers used to say, "Texting on your phone is a waste of time!"

Maybe they should have encouraged us to text more in class! Then I too, could have become famous, and published a SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR ($600,000) novel; like this Tokyo teenager so famous she is now known only as "Bunny." Being a one-named celebrity now puts her right up there with Madonna and ...Madonna?

United Nations Saves Cellphones

Did you know the U.N. had meetings about cellphones? I didn't. Last month in Geneva, Switzerland, the UN telecoms agency passed a law that will make all cellphone chargers universal by 2012.

This policy is international and aims to cut down on global waste (and production) of cell phone chargers. With every type of phone using the same charger, no one will need a new charger when they switch phones. You will also be able to use a friend's charger, or a charger at work if you don't have yours in a pinch!

Dark Side of the Tweet

Remember when Twitter was used to aid the Green Revolution in Iran? Most people thought helping those protectors assemble was a good thing.

Well, that time is past. Welcome to the flipside.

Elliot Madison, a self-proclaimed Anarchist, was using Twitter to broadcast police locations during the recent G-20 Summit. And while investigating the government and sharing information about it would seem to be protected in America, Elliot and his accomplice have been charged with criminal use of communication facility.

Apparently, the growing utility of Twitter has pushed the First Amendment up against a wall. Who would have thought there are some things it's illegal to tweet about?

Death of the Anonymous

Courts are deciding you don't have the right to remain anonymous online. In a recent New York case, one blogger was outed by Google after calling a model a "skank" and "ho." The blogger is now suing Google for $15 million.

Blogger...Google, yes that's right, it involved this website; blogger.com! And I thought Google was on the side of the free man. It's scary to think what Google could do with all it's stored information if they are on the side of the law.

Sued Over a Tweet

Last month I wrote about someone who lost their job due to poor use of GPS. Now, a woman is being sued over her tweet, which criticized Horizon and the mold in her apartment. The offensive part of the tweet read as follows; "Who said sleeping in a moldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon really thinks it's ok."

This is the first lawsuit based solely on a tweet. A lot of people consider Twitter more of a public forum then a publishing method, and public chatter is usually not grounds for defamation lawsuits. But Twitter is still a developing service, and a lot of Tweeters are still not sure what it is. Because it's multifunctional, and so easy to use, it has continued to be loosely defined since it's creation. But in this age of lawsuits, Twitter may end up being defined by an outside source.

Use GPS Wisely

I always thought this XKCD comic about irresponsible use of GPS was hilarious. People going everywhere with their cellphones, unaware what the technology is really capable of:


But today I read about someone who lost their job due to GPS. Sure, they were also falsifying work hours, but they didn't realize that their government-given cellphone was keeping tabs on where they were while they said they were working. I wonder if this guy was at a sex shop, too?