Archive for the ‘Mobile Technology’ Category

What Your Phone Says About Your Views on Democracy

Posted: April 19, 2011 in Mobile Technology, Politics, Technology, Tools/Gadgets
Tags: , , , , ,
0

August 18, 2010- http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978453348

Is your phone listening to what you say? What role does your mobile phone play in aiding the government? Have you ever considered which side your phone is on?

In two different countries mobile communications equipment companies are currently under the microscope for two distinct, but very related problems. For Research in Motion (RIM), the popular company which produces the Blackberry, the company stands accused of failing to provide the Indian government with the help it needs to monitor terrorist activity. For Nokia Siemens, it is quite the opposite: they are being sued by a citizen for aiding the Iranian government in ferreting out political dissidents.

In India RIM is in negotiations with the government to find a common ground which would not force RIM to supply the Indian government with access to the corporate email and SMS messages transferred on its Indian networks. RIM is quickly coming up against an August 31st deadline after which time a cease and desist order has been issued, as the New York Times reported, “wireless phone companies said they had received a formal notice from the government to shut off BlackBerry Messenger and corporate e-mail services on Aug. 31.”

RIM, it would seem, is between a rock and a hard place. The rock, in this case, is the enormous potential of the Indian wireless market. The New York Times estimates “there are an estimated one million BlackBerry users here, and the popularity of the devices is growing as more Indians use e-mail and smartphones.” The hard place is its own commitment and reputation as a company which has done more to protect its corporate customers’ privacy. RIM owes its outstanding success, in large part, to the fact that both corporate and government clients believe in its ability to protect the security of their messages. Let us not forget that President Obama has was granted the right to retain his own Blackberry, and has even stepped in to defend the company in this debate.

For the moment, it seems that in order to retain some chance of serving the second wireless market in the world, RIM has conceded to identify corporations whose servers hold readable, or unencrypted, versions of messages. This would then allow Indian authorities to seek access to the messages from the corporation through a court order. Reportedly, Indian authorities are already working to streamline those legal processes to ensure that the government can access the target messages as quickly as possible.

On the other hand, in Iran, Isa Saharkhiz has filed suit against Nokia Siemens for aiding the Iranian government in surveilling its networks to ferret out political dissidents. Saharkhiz claims that cell phone surveillance was instrumental in her arrest in the events following the 2009 presidential election in Iran.

Specifically, Saharkhiz is accusing Nokia Siemens of helping the Iranian government to violate human rights, a charge which aligns with previous claims by Nobel Peace prizewinner Shirin Ebadi, that Nokia Siemens was “sending ‘the Iranian state software and technology that it can use to monitor telephone calls and text messages.’”

A Nokia Siemens spokesperson recently told AFP “We believe that communication and mobile phone technologies play a significant role in the development of societies and the advancement of democracy.” If the American President and his administration are stepping in to attempt to facilitate some type of cooperation between RIM and the Indian government, and Iranian citizens can sue mobile phone companies for conspiring with the government to infringe on human rights, in the modern age, is one’s choice of phone truly also representative of one’s sentiment toward democracy in general?

Life, Liberty and Net Neutrality? How Net Neutrality Affects American Futures

Posted: April 19, 2011 in Media, Mobile Technology, Politics, Search
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

August 16, 2010- http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978448715

The recent attention surrounding Verizon and Google’s agreement about net neutrality has unearthed manifold issues which are buzzing in the minds of the world’s web users- how free is the internet? And is that freedom an active function of American democracy? Much like free and fair elections, first amendment rights to free speech and the right to congregate, the Internet can be a phenomenal asset to American democracy. In fact, many modern political theorists consider the Web as a pillar of the modern public sphere. However, unlike those variables, a “neutral” Internet is not guaranteed to Americans under constitutional law.

But the issue also pulls in the more capitalistic challenges of the internet which include how to continue to strengthen the American broadband infrastructure and how ISPs can profit from the business of providing access without compromising the neutrality of the content. Certainly the US would not benefit from imposing stringent regulations on ISPs seeking to do business in the US, as the US must also consider the recent news that China has just surpassed Japan as the world’s second largest economy, and is digging in its heels to become #1. In order to remain competitive in the global economy, the business of improving upon the network infrastructure as well as encouraging healthy competition among ISPs will remain very important for the United States.

The issue of net neutrality is also inextricably enmeshed in the ongoing debate concerning Google’s policies of “Don’t Be Evil,” a mantra that has come under fire in recent years due to political fiascos such as Google’s compromises with China. Now Google stands under fire for compromising on their commitment to net-neutrality, and their credibility in the search market may take a hit as a result.

The last issue that is implicated in the net-neutrality debate is whether or not mobile access should be treated the same way that home or PC access is treated? The strains on mobile networks as evidenced by AT&T’s constant game of infrastructural catch-up since signing on with the iPhone have been widely covered, and so it’s easy to see why Verizon is anxious to nip that issue in the bud with Google at the onset.

Each of these issues is clearly significant enough to require full coverage by the news media, but there are deeper implications for American democracy and the freedom of information in the country. Americans often speak of the “right to access the world’s information” in the context of the glorious early days of the Internet, and of course, of Google’s appearance on the world’s stage. However, how far will Americans go to secure that access as a formal right? And would Americans vote for political regulations and requirements that may ultimately limit the quality of that access in favor of guaranteeing it for all?

What the Smartphone “Jailbreaking” Ruling Really Means

Posted: April 19, 2011 in Media, Mobile Technology, Politics, Tools/Gadgets
Tags: , , , ,
0

July 28, 2010- http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978401386

On Monday July 26 the U.S. Library of Congress reached a groundbreaking decision concerning modern copyright laws and thrilling open source advocates the world over. The decision ruled that it was now legal to “jailbreak” a mobile phone. Or, in more vernacularized terminology, it is now legal to open up a phone’s controls to accommodate software that the phone maker had not previously authorized.

The ruling is the result of lobbying by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit digital rights group who had argued for these “exemptions” to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act for several years. Enacted in 1998, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act is a law which specifically extends copyright laws in the US to protect intellectual property and prevent copyright infringement on the Internet.

But what are the implications of the ruling? This decision opens up a huge debate about the differences between hardware and software and the way modern users will approach each as they apply to smartphones. As smartphone adoption and the numbers of application developers continue to rise, it is highly possible that users may begin to regard smartphone services and applications as they regard wifi, music and computer software: as something that should be free, and something that should be easy to share. Could it be that in the future hardware will continue to be something that you buy and invest in, but that software is destined to be free?

The ruling has been widely projected on Apple and its dominantly successful iPhone. As the New York Times wrote in its July 26th article covering the decision, “The issue has been a topic of debate between Apple, which says it has the right to control the software on its devices, and technically adept users who want to customize their phones as they see fit.” Apparently, Apple’s arguments with the US Copyright Office in the past claimed that jailbreaking phones would infringe on Apple’s copyrights by using an altered version of Apple’s OS.

However, hackers should be forewarned that this may not prove to be the complete ‘get out of jail free’ card that they are envisioning. Some mobile phone manufacturers, such as Apple, have countered by threatening that phone warranties will not be honored once a phone has been “jailbroken.”

What do you think of the ruling? Is this the newest banner issue for the open source movement? Do you think of hardware and software separately in this regard?

If You’re Happy and You Know It…So Does Twitter?

Posted: April 19, 2011 in Academics, Industry Research, Media, Mobile Technology, Social Media
Tags: , , ,
16

July 23, 2010- http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978387963

Ladies and gentlemen, you may officially toss out your collection of mood rings. Now there’s a better way to check if we’re happy or not: Twitter.

Computer scientists at Northeastern University have just released a study which presents conclusions regarding the relative happiness of America based on “sentiment analysis” performed on tweet content. One key finding that’s making headlines and ruffling feathers is that Americans living on the West Coast are happier than those living on the East Coast.

For the study, the scientists at Northeastern performed the content analysis on nearly 300 million tweets from Americans and then indexed them according to time of day, sentiment, and location. The analysis was performed using the Affective Norms for English Words, or ANEW, system developed at the NIMH Center for Emotion and Attention at the University of Florida. As described in its manual, ANEW was developed “in order to provide standardized materials that are available to researchers in the study of emotion and attention.” Basically the ANEW system allows researchers to assign different values to a set of pre-selected words in order to determine a relative scale of emotions.

However, as is often the case with an attempt to project standardized values on subjective human behavior, ANEW is not completely reliable. As one article discussing the paper’s findings noted, “if someone types tweets ‘I am not happy’, the system counts the tweet as positive because of the word ‘happy’.” That being said, even as an imperfect tool, the practice of “sentiment analysis” using the ANEW guidelines is actually gaining popularity among large corporations as a tool to measure brand awareness and reactions.

Unfortunately for the study conducted by Northeastern University, most of the results aren’t exactly earth shattering revelations. For example, apparently most of us hate our jobs and prefer the weekends. But the video they put together does offer a nice visual of how the happiness or relative gloominess progresses over the course of an average workday.

What do you think? Do you think text-based “sentiment analysis” is a legitimate form of making these types of conclusions? Do you think the West Coast is, in fact, happier than the East?

How FourSquare Will Control Your Local Billboards

Posted: April 19, 2011 in Advertising, Branding, Industry Research, Marketing, Media, Mobile Technology, Search, Tools/Gadgets
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
0

July 22, 2010: http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978387268

The news recently broke that Foursquare is forming agreements to start charging search engines such as Google and Bing for their geographic location data. Instantly various news sources launched stories seeking to satisfy user curiosities by positing what these information transactions might lead to in the future. Among the many educated guesses were enhanced real-time search, social mapping, and more strongly developed mobile search. I would add one more: more strongly targeted traditional advertising and marketing media.

Internet analysts and emerging media connoisseurs may write disproportionately more about innovative new technologies, but if you ask the advertising and marketing executives of the world if they have abandoned traditional media as part of their integrated campaigns, the answer would be a resounding “no.” The data that Foursquare will provide is a solid reinforcement of retaining those traditional marketing strategies. What we physically see and interact with outside of the realm of our computer and television screens still matters.

Still, it might surprise most people to learn that the data they generate by using Foursquare’s geo-location technology will be used to determine what shows up on their local billboards. Yes, you heard right– billboard. Even if, admittedly, these days that billboard might be digital and therefore closer to a television than the enormous printed posters the term still conjures.

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. Geo-location data brings the internet back to the earth by collecting information on where you were when you saw what. With apps like Foursquare, suddenly it’s not who you are, but where you are and when that matters most again. That means that physical advertising efforts such as billboards can be even better data-driven and targeted to the interests of local populations.

How do you feel about these types of emerging social media and GPS-oriented advertising ventures that will know where you go, where you shop, and where you eat? Do you think of this type of geographically-targeted advertising as convenience, or as an invasion of privacy?

Cream and Sugar with Your Wifi? A Look at the New Starbucks Digital Network

Posted: April 19, 2011 in Advertising, Branding, Industry Research, Marketing, Media, Mobile Technology, Music, Tools/Gadgets
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

(This post can also be found on Gather.com here: http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978618733. It was originally posted October 20, 2010)

Although the coffee giant has been offering free Wi-Fi in the majority of its U.S. retail locations since July 1st, a new exclusive content network called the Starbucks Digital Network (“SDN”) launches October 20th in more than 6,800 of its U.S. operated stores.  The new content network will be specifically curated by the company and is being launched to enhance the customer’s in-store experience on what some might call a fourth dimension- the Web.

“The vision,” Starbucks’s Vice President of Digital Ventures Adam Brotman told Mashable, “is for Starbucks Digital Network to be a digital version of the community cork board that’s in all of our stores.” The move is a strategic one, despite the financial free-wheeling philosophy it seems to represent.

Starbucks has struggled publicly in the last few years with its big-brand, corporate generic image and how to compete with much-loved “mom and pop” coffee stores in big cities. The initial backlash was palpable, but with CEO Howard Schultz back at the helm, Starbucks is now trying to improve its public dedication to the local communities it moves into, and to incorporate many of the elements that make the neighborhood coffee joint a favorite for locals.

Because Starbucks relies so heavily on the in-store experience, the company is attempting to enhance the “third space” look and feel of the retail locations while also providing a stellar “fourth dimension” experience online.

As part of its extensive content network, SDN will offer access to news sites such as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and USA Today, but will also offer additional content channels such as “entertainment, wellness, business and careers, my neighborhood and the customer-personalized Starbucks.” The incorporation of the “my neighborhood” content channel is a pillar in the giant’s strategy to compete with the local feel of smaller community-based coffee shops.

As Brotman told Mashable, SDN “delivers on this objective by serving up content to users based on the exact whereabouts of the store where the user is accessing the free Wi-Fi. Community fare includes local news from Patch and a look at nearby DonorsChoose.org classroom projects that could benefit from small contributions. Foursquare users can check in via the web from Starbucks stores, and Zagat makes available full ratings for restaurants in the surrounding area for free.”

But when is too much, just, too much content? Reportedly, Starbucks will be tracking user activity via web analytics to get a sense of what users respond to. From there they plan to taper the content network and its offerings based on usage research what is most popular.

From the research the company has already gathered based on its free Wi-Fi offerings since July 1st they now know, according to Brotman, that “more than 50% of users logging on to the free Wi-Fi are doing so from mobile devices, so the company was motivated by usage behaviors to build a mobile web experience just as good, if not better than, the standard web experience.”

As a boon for what many regard lately as a foundering hi-tech company, Yahoo is the coffee retailer’s technology partner for the SDN, having developed the site, hosting the SDN, powering search and also providing content. Yet Starbucks is not exactly following a hi-tech profitability model. The coffee behemoth is not charging its content partners for placement on the network, and no financial transactions are taking place unless SDN users make purchases.

Yet as traditional tells us, location is everything. As emerging technologies and social media allow consumers to make more educated, location-based purchasing decisions, perhaps this is Starbucks’ and Yahoo’s way of embedding themselves in communities via an increasingly location-based technology market. As Brotman said, “We’re really excited about the fact that we can leverage the location-based nature of the site to connect our customers with the communities around the stores,” he says.

Newer Entries