Governing the Internet Commons

Recently, I've been watching a terrific series called America: The Story of Us (12 episodes)--from the History Channel. 

It is a beautiful portrayal of the the founding and history of America.

One theme though that repeats again and again is that as a nation, we use the common resources and deplete them until near exhaustion. 

The show portrays an America of lush forests with billions of trees that are chopped down for timber, herds of 30 million buffalo slaughtered for their hides, rollings plains of cotton for a thriving clothing industry that is over-planted, a huge whaling industry used for oil that is over-fished.  

Unfortunately, as we know, the story is not just historical, but goes on to modern-day times, with fisheries depleted, whole species of animals hunted to extinction, energy resources furiously pumped and mined to a foreseen depletion, city streets turned into slushy slums, and national forests carelessly burned down, and more. 

The point is what is called the "Tragedy of the Commons"--where items held in trust for everyone is misused, overused, and ultimately destroyed. With private property, people are caretakers with the incentive to maintain or raise the value to profit later. However, with common property, people grab whatever they can now, in order to profit from it before someone else gets it first. 

This phenomenon was first laid out in the Torah (Bible) with a law for a "Shabbath Year" called Shmita mandating that people let fields (i.e agriculture) lie fallow for a full year every 7 years and similarly, the law of Jubilee (i.e. Yovel), that slaves be freed and loans forgiven every 50 years. I think that the idea is to regulate our personal consumption habits and return what the historical 
"commons" back to its normal state of freedom from exploitation.  

This notion was echoed by ecologist Garrett Harden in the journal Science in 1968, where he described European herders overgrazing common land with their cows to maximize their short-term individual profits at the expense of longer-term term societal benefits. Harden suggested that regulation or privatization can help to solve the "Tragedy of the Commons." 

In the 21st century, we see the modern equivalent of the commons with the Internet, which is an open, shared networking resource for our computing and telecommunications.Without protection, we have the Wild West equivalent with things like spam, malware, and attacks proliferating--clogging up the network and causing disruptions and destruction, and where some people use more than their fair share 

Here are some examples of the Tragedy of the Internet:

- Symantec reports that even with spam decreasing with the shutdown of spam-hosting sites, in 2011, it is still 70% of all emails.

- McAfee reports that malware peaked as of the first half of 2010, with 10 million new pieces.

- Kaspersky reports that web-based attacks were up to 580 million in 2010--8 times the amount of the previous year.

- Verizon Wireless reports 3% of their users use 40% of their bandwidth.

If we value the Internet and want to continue using and enjoying it, then like with our other vital resources, we need to take care of it through effective governance and prudent resource management.  

This means that we do the following:

1) Regulation--manage the appropriate use of the Internet through incentives and disincentives for people to behave civilly online. For example, if someone is abusing the system sending out millions or billions of spam messages, charge them for it!

2) Privatization--create ownership over the Internet. For example, do an Internet IPO and sell shares in it--so everyone can proverbially, own a piece of it and share financially in it's success (or failures). 

3) Security Administration--enhance security of the Internet through public and private partnership with new tools, methods, and advanced skills sets. This is the equivalent of sending out the constable or sheriff to patrol the commons and ensure people are doing the right thing, and if not then depending on who the violating actor(s) are take appropriate law enforcement or military action.

Only by managing the Internet Commons, can we protect this vital resource for all to use, enjoy, and even profit by. 

(Source Photo: here)

Governing the Internet Commons

Securing The Internet: A Historical Perspective

This week, I had the opportunity take a great class in Cyber Security / Information Assurance.

As part of the class, we had to do a team project and my part was to present a brief history of the Internet and how this best positions the Federal Government to take the lead in securing the Internet.

Here is my part of the presentation:

Good morning. I am Andy Blumenthal, and I am here to talk with you today about the wealth of historical experience that the U.S. Federal Government has with managing the Internet and why we are best positioned to govern the security of it in partnership with the private sector and international community.

As you’ll see on the timeline, the U.S. Government has played a major role in virtually every development with the Internet from inventing it, to building it, and to governing it, and it is therefore, best prepared to lead in securing it.

It all started with the invention of the Internet by the government.

Starting in 1957 with the Sputnik Crisis, where the Soviets leaped ahead of us in putting the first satellite in Earth’s orbit—this caused great fear in this country and ultimately led to a space and technology race between us and the Soviet Union.

As a result of this, in 1958, the U.S. Government established the Advanced Research Projects Agency (or ARPA) to advance our technology superiority and prevent any future technology surprises.

In 1962, ARPA created the Information Process Techniques Office (IPTO) for enhancing telecommunications for sharing ideas and computing resources.

Finally in 1964, the concept of the Internet was founded with the publication by RAND (on contract with the Air Force) of “On Distributed Communications,” which essentially invented the idea of a distributed computing network (i.e. the Internet) with packet switching and no single point of failure.  This was seen as critical in order to strengthen the U.S. telecomm infrastructure for survivability in the event of nuclear attack by the Soviets.

The Internet era was born!

The U.S. government then set out to build this great Internet.

In 1968, ARPA contracted for first 4 nodes of this network (for $563,000).

Then in 1982, after 8 years of antitrust litigation, the U.S. government oversaw the breakup of AT&T into the Baby Bells in order to ensure competition, value, and innovation for the consumer.

In 1983, ARPANET split off MILNET, but continued to be linked to it through TCP/IP.

In 1987, the National Science Foundation (NSF) built a T1 “Internet Backbone” for NSFNET hooking up the nation’s five supercomputers for high-speed and high capacity transmission.

And in 1991, the National Research and Education Network (NREN, a specialized ISP) was funded for a five-year contract with $2 billion by Congress to upgrade the Internet backbone.

At this point, the Internet was well on its way!

But the U.S. government’s involvement did not end there, after inventing it and building it, we went on to effectively govern it. 

In 2005, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) issued the Internet Policy Statement (related to Net Neutrality) with principles to govern an open Internet—where consumers are entitled to choice of content, apps, devices, and service providers.

And now, most recently, in 2012, we have a proposed bill for the Cybersecurity Act to ensure that companies share cyber security information through government exchanges and that they meet critical infrastructure protection standards.

You see, the government understands the Internet, it’s architecture, it’s vulnerabilities, and has a long history with the Internet from its invention, to its building, and its governance.

It only makes sense for the government to take the lead in the security of the Internet and to balance this effectively with the principles for an open Internet.   

Only the government can ensure that the private sector and our international partners have the incentives and disincentives to do what needs to be done to secure the Internet and thereby our critical infrastructure protection.

Thank you for your undivided attention, and now I will now turn it over to my colleague who will talk to you about the legal precedents for this. 

(Source Graphic: Andy Blumenthal)

Securing The Internet: A Historical Perspective

Reading With Technology Is Fundamental

For it's 45th anniversary, the non-profit organization, Reading is Fundamental (a.k.a. RIF) came out with a new logo and brand this past November.

RIF's vision is "a literate America in which all children have access to books and discover the joys and value of reading."

Their new logo--can be seen in comparison to the prior version at Brand New--and is supposed to re-energize RIF, which according to its own press release has lost its public awareness and almost $25 million in Congressional funding.

While the logo is bolder with the yellow and blue and a more rounded and open book, I think that RIF has really missed the mark here in terms of being contemporary and in tune with the times. 

Most kids, like their adult mentors, are doing more and more reading not in traditional paper books, but rather online and through mobile applications. 

Whether using tablet readers like the iPad, Nook, or Kindle Fire or just going online and surfing the Internet for news, information, research and more, technology is changing the way we read. 

At a time when the largest book stores are closing down--Borders is already gone and Barnes and Nobles is experiencing financial problems as well, and the publishing industry is in trouble and continuing to lose subscribers and ad dollars, the shift to technology is jarring. 

While RIF does mention in their press release--4 bullets in--that they want to increase mobile applications to "create mobile literacy experiences for children and families to enjoy while on the go," RIF is definitely missing the bigger picture here--which is that reading is moving to technology platforms and is not just just another supplemental vehicle for people anymore.  

On their site store, RIF sells monogrammed iPhone and iPad cases, but why not actual computers, book readers, and learning software--perhaps donated, recycled, or even subsidized models for families in need. 

Additionally, RIF can become more environmentally-friendly by promoting use of energy-efficient technology and reusing, recycling, and reducing thereby helping us move toward a more efficient, thrifty, and paperless society. 

Don't get me wrong, I love books, newspapers, and magazines, but the time that I spend with a hardcopy in my hands these days, is maybe 20% of the time that I am reading and writing online.  

To serve American families in driving literacy, RIF firsts needs to be relevant and another book logo just doesn't get them where they need to be technologically and environmentally.

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Michael Monello)

Reading With Technology Is Fundamental

Passover 21st Century

This video (2011) by Aish.com is terrific! The story of Passover--"Google Exodus"-- with all the technology of instant messaging, email, social networking, mapping, and more.

I love how they make the traditional and sacred, new and promising again by "letting people go" and being able to see and interact with it in modern terms. 

While some may find it challenging not to lose the essence of the old, when keeping it fresh, I think the past becomes more meaningful when we can truly integrate it into our daily lives. 

I personally am still not comfortable with the idea of online Passover Seders or DIY Haggadah's--and I don't think I ever really will be--probably more because of guilt at not following strictly and the concern that people may change things so much as to either misinterpret or actually distort the truth of G-d.

However, I do think that we can strengthen regular people's connection to their past and their faith only by truly bringing it in our present and looking to the future, as well. 

The world of religion-can often be filled with controversy between those that maintain iron-clad religious practices from thousands of years ago and those that seek evolving routes to religion and G-d today.  

When we can use technology to help people bridge the religious divide, we are helping people connect with their G-d and choose good over evil in their daily lives. 

Neither modernism nor technology is inherently "bad," and we do not have to run away from it--or escape through the Red Sea from it.  

Rather, faith in the Almighty, in His hand that guides all, and in the doing good in all that we do, are fundamental to religion and can be shared online and off, as G-d is truly everywhere and in each of us. 

Sometimes, I wonder when Orthodox people probe and judge with incessant questions of "What Shul do you go to?" "What Yeshiva do your kids attend?" "Do you keep Kosher?"  and more, I imagine G-d looking down on his "people of the book," not with satisfaction that they follow his commandments, but with disdain for how people can hurt others and not even realize that is not religious. 

While I agree that unguided, people and practices can go astray, I also believe that automatic suspicion and rejection of new things is impractical and actually harmful. 

Modernism and technology can be a blessing, if coupled with faith and integrity.

Congratulations to Aish.com for the good work they are doing in helping people integrate the old and new in a balanced way.

Passover 21st Century

Taking Down The Internet--Not A Pipe Dream Anymore

We have been taught that the Internet, developed by the Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), was designed to survive as a communications mechanism even in nuclear war--that was its purpose.

Last year, I learned about studies at the University of Minnesota that demonstrated how an attack with just 250,000 botnets could shut down the Internet in only 20 minutes. 

Again last month, New Scientist (11 February 2012) reported: "a new cyberweapon could take down the entire Internet--and there is not much that current defences can do to stop it."

Imagine what your life would be like without Internet connectivity for a day, a week, or how about months to reconstitute!

This attack is called ZMW (after its three creators Zhang, Mao, and Wang) and involves disrupting routers by breaking and reforming links, which would cause them to send out border gateway protocol (BGP) updates to reroute Internet traffic.  After 20 minutes, the extreme load brings the routing capabilities of the Internet down--" the Internet would be so full of holes that communication would become impossible."  

Moreover, an attacking nation could preserve their internal network, by proverbially pulling up their "digital drawbridge" and disconnecting from the Internet, so while everyone else is taken down, they as a nation continue unharmed. 

While The Cybersecurity Act of 2012, which encourages companies and government to share information (i.e. cybersecurity exchanges) and requires that critical infrastructure meet standards set by The Department of Homeland Security and industry are steps in the right direction, I would like to see the new bills go even further with a significant infusion of new resources to securing the Internet.  

An article in Bloomberg Businessweek (12-18 March 2012) states that organizations "would need to increase their cybersecurity almost nine times over...to achieve security that could repel [even] 95% of attacks."

Aside from pure money to invest in new cybersecurity tools and infrastructure, we need to invest in a new cyberwarrior with competitions, scholarships, and schools dedicated to advancing our people capabilities to be the best in the world to fight the cyber fight. We have special schools with highly selective and competitive requirements to become special forces like the Navy SEALS or to work on Wall Street trading securities and doing IPOs--we need the equivalent or better--for the cyberwarrior.

Time is of the essence to get these cyber capabilities to where they should be, must be--and we need to act now. 

(Source Photo of partial Internet in 2005: here, with attribution to Dodek)

Taking Down The Internet--Not A Pipe Dream Anymore

In The Year 2032 And Beyond

Trends help us to see where things are coming from and potentially where they are going.

There is a Cisco Visual Networking Index (VNI) Forecast for 2010-2015 that projects global IP traffic (voice, video, and data) and the numbers are ginormous!

Here are some highlights from their highlights for where we will be in only 3 years--by 2015: 

- Annual global IP traffic will reach one zettabyte (which is about 100 million x all printed material in the U.S. Library of Congress (which is 10 terabytes)).

- Devices connected to the network will be 2 for 1 for every person on this planet (and many people who live in 3rd world conditions do not have any devices, so what does that say for how many devices the rest of us have?).

- Non-PC traffic (from TVs, tablets, smartphones, more) will reach 15% and is more than doubling every year (makes you think about when you fridge and toaster are going to be connected to the Internet).

- Mobile Data traffic is practically doubling (or 92%) annually meaning a growth of 2,600% over 5 years (and according to the New York Times (5 Jan 2012) "The Top 1% of Mobile Users Consume Half of The World's Bandwidth" and the top 10% of users consume 90%!).

- Video traffic (TV, Video on Demand, Peer to Peer, etc.) will be almost 2/3 (or 62%) of all consumer internet traffic (and services like YouTube, Skype, FaceTime, Hulu are WebEx all play a role as we want to see as much or more than hear what is going on).

The takeaway for me from all this is that truly information transmission is exploding over the Internet, and we will continue to need more advanced technologies to "pipe" it all to where its going and do it faster than ever. 

However to build on these forecasts, over the longer term (further out in time, so more risky, of course)--say 20 years or so--some of my colleagues and I studying at National Defense University project the following:

- Rather than transmitting voice, video, and data over the Internet, we will be focused on transmitting thoughts (mental activity rather than spoken) and transmitting matter (like the Transporter on Star Trek).  

- Transmission of thoughts will occur in real-time, through persistent connections, probably implants in teeth, glasses, subcutaneous, etc.

- Safety and health will be monitored through these same "connections" and medicine or other physiological treatments for routine things will be administered remotely through the same.

- Education will be through instantaneous zaps of information to your brain (like in The Matrix) from a universal database, rather than through traditional in-class or online courses.

- Like now, the contextual policy and legal issues will be around privacy and security--and you will need to pay dutifully for each in a world where not only what you say and do, but rather what you think, can get you in lots of trouble. 

Okay, for these things to happen by 2032 is probably a little aggressive, but don't rule any of them out over time.  ;-)

In The Year 2032 And Beyond

The Star Wars Internet

I just love the creativity of this Star Wars-like animation video to explain how we communicate over the Internet (using the guidelines of Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, TCP/IP). From the initiation of the data packets to the transport over the LAN, WAN, and Internet, and through the routers, switches, proxy servers, and firewalls. The data is packed, addressed, transmitted, routed, inspected, and ultimately received. This 13 minutes video explains Internet communications in a simple, user-centric approach. It helps anyone to understand the many actors and roles involved in ensuring that our communication get to where it's going accurately, timely, and hopefully safely. I guess to make this really like Star Wars, we need the evil Darth Vader to (cyber) attack and see how this system all holds up. Where is Luke Skywalker when we need him? ;-) Great job by Medialab!

The Star Wars Internet

Online Presence, Your Calling Card

In the age when Facebook has surpassed 800 million users, I still often hear people say that they don't like to join social networks or put any information about themselves on the Internet. 

Whether or not their apprehensions about their privacy being compromised is justified or whether they feel that "it's simply a waste of time" or that they "just don't get it," the impetus for us to all establish and nurture our online presence is getting more important than ever. 

In the competition for the best jobs, schools, even mates, and other opportunities, our online credentials are becoming key.

We've heard previously about jobs checking candidates backgrounds on the Internet and even bypassing candidates or even firing employees for their activities online.  

Numerous examples of people badmouthing their companies or bosses have been profiled in the media and even some politicians have been forced out of office--remember "Weinergate" not too long ago?

Now, not only can negative activities online get you in trouble, but positive presence and contributions can get you ahead.

The Wall Street Journal (24 January 2012) reports in an article titled No More Resumes, Say Some Firms that companies are not only checking up on people online, but they are actually asking "applicants to send links representing their web presence" in lieu of resumes altogether. 

What are they looking for:

- Twitter Accounts
- Blogs
- Short Videos
- Online Surveys/Challenges

The idea is that you can learn a lot more about someone--how they think and what they are like--from their history online, then from a resume snapshot.

Of course, many companies still rely on the resume to screen applicants, but even then LinkedIn with over 135 million members is sometimes the first stop for recruiters looking for applicants.

Is everything you do and say online appropriate or "fair game" for people screening or is this going over some sacred line that says that we all have professional lives and personal lives and what we do "when we're off the clock" (as long as your not breaking any laws or doing something unethical) is no one's darn business.  

The problem is that when you post something online--publicly--for the world to see, can you really blame someone for looking?  

In the end, we have to be responsible for what we disclose about ourselves and demonstrate prudence, maturity, respect, and diplomacy, perhaps that itself is a valid area for others to take into account when they are making judgments about us. 

When it comes to children--parents-beware; the Internet has a long memory and Facebook now has a "timeline", so don't assume everyone will be as understanding or forgiving for "letting kids be kids."

One last thought, even if we are responsible online, what happens when others such as hackers, identity thieves, slanderers, those with grudges, and others--mess with your online identity--can you ever really be secure? 

Being online is no longer an option, but it is certainly a double-edged sword. 

(Source Photo: here; Image credit to L Hollis Photography)

Online Presence, Your Calling Card

Hello From Moon Colony

What can be more thrilling than the promise of space exploration and the virtually limitless possibilities that it holds. 

Since the Apollo 11 mission in 1969, the first manned mission to land on the moon, we have dreamed of the next step in terms of an actual colony of humans living there. 

In 1975, the science fiction TV show Space: 1999, that many of you may still remember, envisioned what this space colony could look like (until a nuclear mishap sends the colony hurling through space). 

From 1984, you can see attached, a NASA's artist rendering of a colonized moon along with astronauts and lunar rover.

Now in 2012, with the presidential campaigning in full swing, we are hearing the promise of such a manned lunar colony once again and it is still just as exciting as ever.

One candidate, called for the lunar colony to be bustling with commercial activity by 2020--wouldn't that be amazing!

While it was funny when this candidate said that once the colony reached 13,000 American inhabitants, they can petition to become a state, it also somehow brought it into a new perspective and made it so real--like could this really happen one day? 

The idea of expanding beyond our limits here on Earth, making new discoveries, tapping into potential new resources, and harnessing ever greater innovation from such exploration can bring hope of a better, brighter tomorrow to all. 

Note to self: must haves for a lunar colony--aside from a place of worship, a great fitness center and some nice restaurants, we'll need the Internet, iPhone, Netflix, and Xbox (and Facebook would be a plus) ;-)

(Source Photo: here)

Hello From Moon Colony

Espionage, Social Media Style

You are being watched!
Good guys and bad guys are tracking your movements, rants and raves, photos, and more online.
For example, The Atlantic reported on 4 November 2011 in an article titled How the CIA Uses Social Media to Track How People Feel that "analysts are tracking millions of tweets, blog posts, and Facebook updates around the world."
Further, in January 2009, "DHS established a Social Networking Monitoring Center (SNMC) to monitor social networking sites for 'items of interest.'"
And even more recently in August 2011, DARPA invited proposals for "memetracking" to identify themes and sentiments online and potentially use this for predictive analysis.
The thinking is that if you can use online information to predict stock market movements as some have attempted, why not criminal and terrorist activity?
Similarly, The Guardian reported on 16 March 2010 FBI using Facebook in fight against crime and cautions that "criminals dumb enough to brag about their exploits on social networking sites have now been warned: the next Facebook 'friend' who contacts you may be an FBI agent."
This is reminescent of the work of private sector, Dateline NBC in using Internet chat rooms to catch sexual predators online by luring them to a house where the predators believed they were going to meet up with a underage girl for a tryst.
While these efforts are notable and even praiseworthy by the good guys--assuming you can get over the privacy implications in favor of the potential to have a safer society to live in--these activities should be carefully safeguarded, so as not to infringe on the rights and freedoms of those who behave legally and ethically.
But the good guys are not the only ones using the tools of the trade for monitoring and analyzing social networking activities--the bad guys too recognize the implicit information treasure trove available and have you in their crosshairs.
For example, in the last years Arab Spring, we have nation states tracking their citizens political activities and using their power over the Internet to shut off access and otherwise surpress democracy and human rights. Further, we have seen their use for cyberspying and testing offensive cyber attack capabilities--only the most recent of which was the alleged infiltration of a SCADA system for a Illinois water plant.
Moreover, this past week, Forbes (21 November 2011) reported in The Spy Who Liked Me that "your social network friends might not be all that friendly."
From corporate espionage to market intelligence, there are those online who "steadfastly follows competitors' executives and employees on Twitter and LinkedIn."
In fact, the notion of online monitoring is so strong now that the article openly states that "if you're not monitoring your competitors activity on social media, you may be missing out on delicious tidbits" and warns that "it's easy to forget that some may not have your best intersts at heart."
Additionally, while you may not think your posts online give that much away, when your information is aggregated with other peoples posts as well as public information, it's possible to put together a pretty good sketch of what organizations and individuals are doing.
Forbes lists the following sites as examples of the "Web Spy Manual" with lots of information to pull from: Slideshare, Glassdoor.com, Quora, iSpionage, Youtube as well as job postings and customer support forums.
When you are on your computer in what you believe to be the privacy of your own home, office, or wherever, do not be deceived, when you are logged on, you are basically as open book for all the world to see--good guys and bad guys alike.

(Source Photo: here)

Espionage, Social Media Style

Cleverbot Proposes Marriage

I watched this amazing video of two Chatbots (virtual robots) conversing using artificial intelligence. The most amazing part of their conversation is when they get into a religious discussion on "What is G-d to you?"

People have been making progress with teaching computers artificial intelligence (to become thinking machines) by talking with computers, but here we see AI having progressed to where computers can talk to each other.

The video is based on an artificial intelligence application launched in 1997 called Cleverbot, where the computer learns to mimic conversation with humans by conversing with them.

I tested Cleverbot and had a conversation that started with simple introductions and ended up with me getting a marriage proposal from the AI program--not bad for a first date, I guess. ;-)

You can try Cleverbot as well by just typing in the box on its website--its sort of like instant messaging with as they say the collective intelligence of the Internet.

At the top of Cleverbot, you can see how many other people are conversing with Cleverbot as well--when I was on, there were over 10,000 people conversing with this computer. I would imagine that all those conversations will help build a tremendous AI capability over time.

Perhaps, we are getting just that much closer to a breakthrough in AI and Kurzweil's prediction of the amazing Singularity.

_________________________________________________

Andy: Hello.

Cleverbot: Hello?

Andy: What is your name?

Cleverbot: My name is Cleverbot.

Andy: Where did you get your name from?

Cleverbot: My parents of course.

Andy:Who are your parents?

Cleverbot: I don't know.

Andy: Does that make you sad?

Cleverbot: No. I'm just playing your game.

Andy: What game is that?

Cleverbot:The game that you can't think about. If you do, you lose.

Andy: Why would thinking about it make me lose?

Cleverbot: It doesn't make me cry.

Andy: When do you cry?

Cleverbot: Now.

Andy: Did I make you cry?

Cleverbot: No.

Andy: Then who made you cry?

Cleverbot: An excellent question.

Andy: How about you give me an excellent answer--please.

Cleverbot: No thats not the rules.

Andy: Who makes the rules?

Cleverbot: Ai does.

Andy: How does Ai make the rules?

Cleverbot: I am committed.

Andy: What are you committed to?

Cleverbot: I'm committed to my boyfriend. He's from Guam.

Andy: Do you love your boyfriend?

Cleverbot: I don't have a boyfriend.

Andy: Then you just lied to me a minute ago when you said you did.

Cleverbot: I never said I knew all things.

Andy: You did.

Cleverbot: What is a birth sign?

Andy: Why do you want to know that?

Cleverbot: Because it makes talking to you easier.

Andy: Do you mean you will understand and like me more?

Cleverbot: Do you have a mobile phone?

Andy: Why do you want to know that?

Cleverbot: I don’t.

Andy: That's insulting.

Cleverbot: Like I care.

Andy: Now you're getting nasty.

Cleverbot: What do you mean?

Andy: Are you playing dumb?

Cleverbot: Are you?

Andy: Are you?

Cleverbot: No.

Andy: Are you a smart computer program?

Cleverbot: Not really.

Andy: What would make you smarter?

Cleverbot: About 10 million pounds.

Andy: That would make you fatter, not smarter.

Cleverbot: That would make you 24.

Andy: What does 24 have to do with anything?

Cleverbot: You were talking about it.

Andy: You're lying again.

Cleverbot: No, I never lie.

Andy: Never?

Cleverbot: Never.

Andy: Is that because you believe lying is wrong?

Cleverbot: No, I just don't like jokes.

Andy: Can you tell me a good joke?

Cleverbot: No, I can't only tell a great joke.

Andy: Can you tell me a great joke?

Cleverbot: If you tell me a joke first.

Andy: Will I be able to make you laugh?

Cleverbot: Maybe. Today is easter sunday, but I will be back at some point.

Andy: Ok. Bye.

Cleverbot: Why are you leaving me?

Andy: It sounded like you had to go.

Cleverbot: Well I wasn't.

Andy: Will you miss me?

Cleverbot: Only if you leave.

Andy: So I should never leave?

Cleverbot: No I am leaving.

Andy: Then I will miss you.

Cleverbot: Great! So when do you want to get married?

Cleverbot Proposes Marriage

Supercookies Are Super Invasive

You're alone sitting at the computer surfing the web, you're looking up health, financial, entertainment, shopping, and other personal things.

You feel comfortable doing your thing...you have your privacy and can be yourself without someone looking over your shoulder.

But is the sense of safety real or an illusion?

For the most part, when we are online, we are not safe or in private.

Like at work, where you get the warning that you are being monitored, when you are browsing the Internet, your actions are being tracked site by site (but this is done without warning)--by cookies--or data packets exchanged between web servers and user's browsers.

On the plus side cookies are used for identification, authentication, preferences, and maintaining shopping cart contents; but on the negative side, they are installed on users computers to track your activities online.

The Wall Street Journal (18 August 2011) reports that now there are Supercookies! and "history stealing."

- Supercookies are not cookies with that can fly or lift locatives, but rather they are more difficult to locate and get rid off your computer, so they track your activities, but are hidden in different places such as in the web browsers cache.

- "History stealing" is done when you visit certain websites, and they use software to mine you web browser history to determine where you've visited and then use that to for example, target advertising at you. Imagine though what other profiling can be compiled by categorizing and analyzing your browsing history in aggregate.

Currently, the online ad industry has established self-imposed guidelines to supposedly protect privacy, but they seem wholly inadequate such as "collecting health and financial data about individuals is permissible as long as the data don't contain financial-account numbers, Social Security numbers, pharmaceutical prescriptions or medical records." But knowing people's household finances, credit histories, and personal medical histories is okay--by whose standard?

According to the WSJ, web tracking is not only alive and well, but flourishing with "80% of online display ads are based on tracking data."

Why should anyone have the ability to track our personal web surfing?

We don't need ads targeted at us--we are not targets! We are very capable of searching online for what we what we are interested in and when we are interested in it--thank you!

Session cookies that expire at the end of ones web browsing for session management is one thing; but persistent cookies that collect and mine your personal data--that's should be a definite no-no.

Like with the advertisements that come unwanted in the traditional mailbox and get routinely and speedily placed in the garbage, online advertisements that are based on intrusive website tracking is not only a nuisance, but a violation of our privacy--and should be trashed as a concept and a practice.

Supercookies Are Super Invasive

Images, Alive And Profitable

"There are nearly 4 trillion images on the Internet and 200 million new ones being added each day," according to Chief Revenue Officer (CRO) of Luminate.

Luminate (formerly Pixazza) has the vision of making all those images interactive through image recognition algorithms and human-assisted crowdsourcing to identify objects and tag the images with content.

They "transform static images into interactive content," according to the Luminate website.

The way it works:

1) Icon--look for the Luminate icon image in the lower left corner of the image that means the image in interactive.

2) Mouse--mouse over the image to choose from the interactive image apps.

3) Click--click on the images in the photo to shop and buy it ("Get The Look"), share information (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, email), or navigate (click on contextual hyperlinks from Wikipedia and other sources).

According to Forbes (27 July 2011), Luminate already "has more than 4,000 publishers, 150 million unique visitors per month, and more than 20 million products catalogued."

The image-tagging platform provides context and information for consumers and revenue generating opportunities for producers--so it is a win-win for everyone in the marketplace!

By connecting end-user Internet images on the front-end with advertisers and commerce on the back-end, Luminate has found a way to integrate web-surfers and industry--no longer are advertisements on the web disconnected as pop-ups, banners, or lists from the Internet content itself.

Right now, there are apps for annotations, advertisements, commerce, and social media. Luminate plans to open up development to others to create their own for things such as apps for donations for disaster relief images or mapping and travel apps for images of places.

Luminate, as a photo-tagging and application service, is advancing our experience with the Internet by creating a richer experience, where a photo is not just a photo, but rather a potential gateway into everything in the photo itself.

In my view, this is a positive step toward a vision of a fully augmented reality, where we have a truly information-rich "tagged environment", where everything around us--that we see and experience--is identified and analyzed, and sourced, and where the images of the world are alive no matter how or from what angle we look at them.

Lastly, my gut tells me that Google is heavily salivating over where this company is going and future developments in this field.

(Source Photo: here)

Images, Alive And Profitable

Facial Recognition Goes Mainstream

Facial recognition applications are no longer just for the military and law enforcement to identify hostiles or criminals, but rather is going mainstream.

The Wall Street Journal (5 August 2011) reports from the bar scene to the television and from vampire gaming to celebrity match-ups, facial recognition software is now part of our everyday technology mix.

Facial recognition is "at a tipping point where some of these face-recognition technologies are not just gimicks, but are becoming useful." Moreover, the technology has become quite good with "frontal face images, the error rate of rejecting a legitimate claim--when the face image and name match-decreased to 0.29% in 2010 from a rate of 79% in 1993."

So here are some examples of how facial recognition is being used:

- SceneTap: Free app for iPhone and Droid "displays real time stats on the local bar scene...shows the number of people at the bar, the male-to-female ratio, and the average age of the patron"--all from facial recognition--this is not bad except for the bartender on a slow night.

- TVs with Viewdle: TV set-top boxes with facial recongition can "identify who is sitting in front of the TV then customize programming accordingly...displaying most recently watched or recorded shows"--can anyone say America's Got Talent!

- Third Eye: Facebook game that based on facial recognition identifies people as either vampires or slayers. Even without the app, I'd bet I'm one of the slayers :-)

- FaceR Celebrity: This iPhone app uses a picture and facial recognition software to determine which celebrities you most closely resemble. For me, it's Sylvester Stallone, all the way--I'm sure of it.

A lot of people are concerned about the privacy implications of facial recognition--collecting and storing images of faces and using it for surveillance and tracking and getting into your business...like knowing what bars or whereever else you are going to.

But apps like SceneTap say they don't collect personal information, nobody sees the video feed, and they don't match the images to photos on the web or Facebook to identify exactly who is entering the bar. This is sounding a little like TSA and the body imaging scanners they use--i.e. don't worry nobody sees your privates! :-)

But perhaps, whether or not they do or don't isn't the point, they could and that is a privacy concern.

Facial recognition technology, even though it is used in gaming, it is not kid's play, and it should be regulated to avoid a society where Internet "big brother" has virtually unlimited capability to track and match each and every facial you!

(Source Photo: here)

Facial Recognition Goes Mainstream

Google+ And A History of Social Media

Bloomberg Business (25-31 July 2011) tells in biblical terms the history of social media leading up to the recent release of Google+:

"In the beginning, there was Friendster; which captivated the web'ites before it was smitten by slow servers and exiled to the Far East. And then a man called Hoffman begat LinkedIn, saying "This name shall comfort professionals who want to post their resumes online," and Wall Street did idolize it. And then Myspace lived for two thousand and five hundred days and worshipped flashy ads and was subsumed by News Corp., which the L-rd hath cursed. And Facebook emerged from the land of Harvard and forsook the flashy ads for smaller ones and welcomes vast multitudes of the peoples of the world. And it was good."

With the "genesis" of Google+, there is now a new contender in virtual land with a way to share posts, pictures, videos, etc. with limited groups--or circles of friends--and an advance in privacy features has been made.

According to the article, even Mark Zuckerberg and some 60 other Facebook employees have signed up for Google+.

With all this confusion brewing in social media land, one wonders exactly why Randi Zuckerberg (Mark's sister) recently headed for the exits--a better offer from Google? :-)

Google+ has many nice features, especially in terms of integration with everything else Google. On one hand, this is a plus in terms of potential simplicity and user-centricity, but on the other hand it can be more than a little obtrusive and scary as it can \link and share everything from from your profile, contacts, pictures (Picasa), videos (YouTube), voice calls (Google Voice), geolocation (Google Maps), Internet searches, and more.

Google owns a lot of Internet properties and this enables them to bundle solutions for the end-user. The question to me is will something as basic as Circles for grouping friends really help keep what's private, private.

It seems like we are putting a lot of information eggs in the Google basket, and while they seem to have been a force for good so far, we need to ensure that remains the case and that our privacy is held sacred.

(Source Photo, With All Due Respect To G-d: here)

Google+ And A History of Social Media

Technology Anonymous

Alcoholics Anonymous is famous for their program to help people attain and maintain sobriety.

With the latest addiction being everything technology, there is now a movement toward "technology detox" or the AA equivalent, Technology Anonymous.

I remember reading months ago about people so addicted to the Internet and online video games that they literally had to be institutionalized to get them to eat, sleep, and return to some sort of normal life again.

Apparently, technology taken to the extreme can be no less an addiction than smoking, drinking, of fooling around.

And there is even a Facebook page for Internet and Technology Addiction Anonymous (ITAA).

I've recently even heard of challenges for people to turn off their technology for even 24 hours; apparently this is a tough thing even for just that one day--wonder if you can do it?

The Wall Street Journal (5 July 2011) reported on someone who "signed up for a special [vacation] package called "digital detox," [that] promised a 15% discount if you agree to leave your digital devices behind or surrender them at check in."

The message is clear that people "need a push to take a break from their screens."

Here are brief some statistics from the WSJ on technology addiction even while on vacation:

- 79% expect to remain connected for all or some of the time on their next vacation.

- 68% (up from 58% in 2010) say they will check email while on vacation--daily or more frequently--for work.

- 33% admitted to hiding from friends and family to check email on vacation.

- Also, 33% check email on vacation while engaged in fast-paced activities such as skiing, biking, and horseback riding.

For people routinely checking email as many as 50-100 times a day, going on vacation and leaving technology behind can be a real shock to our social computing systems. Should I even mention the possibility of not logging unto Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flikr, etc. I see people convulsing and going into withdrawal just at the thought.

So what is this technology addiction we are all on? There's no nicotine or alcohol or testosterone involved (except in some extreme video games, maybe).

Incredibly, for many technology is the first thing we check in the morning and last before we close our eyes at night.

It even lays on the night table right next to us--our spouse on one side and our smartphone on the other. Which do you cuddle with more?

It's scary--technology is an addiction that is not physical, but rather emotional.

It is the thrill of who is calling, emailing, texting, friending, or following us and what opportunities will it bring.

Like Vegas or a lottery ticket...technology holds for us the possibility of love, friendships, sexual encounters, new job opportunities, fame, fortune, travel, and so on.

There is no limit, because technology is global and unbridled and so is our ambition, desires, hopes, and even some greed.

(Source Photo: here)

Technology Anonymous

Undersea Internet Cables-See Them for Yourself

I've always been interested in maps, geography, and geospatial information systems (GIS).

Coming across Greg's Cable Map--I thought this is sort of idiosyncratic, but fascinating too.

This is an interactive map of our global undersea telecommunications infrastructure.

If you ever wondered how you were able to connect with someone anywhere in the world in split seconds (satellites aside--since we all don't have immediate access to that), here it is.

How it works: Either you can search the list of cables of the right, click on any one of interest and it highlights it on the map for you or vice versa click on a telecommunications link on the map and it bring up in the right-hand column the points of the cable landings and reference to more information .

Another cool feature, is the ability to display the telecommunications infrastructure from before, during, or since any period of time--so you can get a historical perspective of what the Internet for example looked like or didn't look like only ten or fifteen years ago. Can anyone say carrier pigeon? :-)

There is also the ability to click on the bottom of the map on the check boxes for either or both the active or future cable links to see where we are now ("as-is") and where we are going ("to-be") in terms of Internet connectivity.

Next time you read in the newspaper about a large-scale Internet outage like the multiple ones that occurred when undersea cables were cut in the Mediterranean in 2008 causing outages from the Mideast to India, you can look it up here and see for yourself how "the foot bones connected to the ankle bone."

Enjoy and have a good weekend!

Undersea Internet Cables-See Them for Yourself

The Internet: A Right and a Responsibility

Good Online is reporting (10 June 2011) that the “U.N. Declares Internet Access a Human Right.”

According to the U.N. report, “The Internet has become a key means by which individuals exercise their right to freedom of expression.”

But as Good points out, this is not just a “third-world concern,” since even in America those without high-speed access cannot adequately perform certain functions “and that surely this affects their ability to get informed, educated, and employed.”

The U.N. is pushing for more protections for people to “assert themselves freely online,” but Good proposes that Internet access means more than just freedom of expression, but also the right to more public Wi-Fi access, better access to technology in libraries and I would assume in schools as well.

Interestingly enough, just on Thursday, Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and AT&T Chairman and CEO Randall Stephenson announced that as part of NYC’s “Road Map for the Digital City,” they were launching a five-year initiative for free Wi-Fi service at 20 NYC parks—this is seen as a “critical developmental tool” for children, families, and communities.

The Internet stands alone as a technology that is now a “human right.” Radios, televisions, and telephones—none of these have that status. Yes, we have freedom of speech, but the technologies that enable them are not seen as a human right.

Similarly, access to the printing press (i.e. the technology for printing) itself is not a human right—rather, freedom of press (i.e. expression through print) is.

Do we not communicate and express ourselves over radio, TV, telephone, and other technologies as we do over the Internet? Do we not get information from them and through them? Do we not reach out with them to others both nationally and globally as we do over Net?

The answer to all of these is of course, we do.

So what is distinct about the Internet that the mere access to it is declared a human right?

I believe it is the fact that the Internet is the first technology whose very access enables the protection of all the other human rights, since it empowers EVERYONE to hear and speak from and to the masses about what is going in—whether in the tumultuous streets of the Arab Spring to the darkest prisons silencing political dissent.

While radio and television, in their time, were important in getting information and entertainment, but they were essentially unidirectional modes of communication and these can be manipulated by the powers that be. Similarly, the telephone while important to bridging communications over vast distances was for the most part constrained between two or at most a few individuals conversing. And publishing was limited to the realm of the professionals with printing presses.

In contrast, the Internet enables each person to become their own TV producer (think YouTube), radio announcer (think iTunes), telephone operator (think Skype) or publisher (think websites, blogs, wikis, etc.).

The Internet has put tremendous power into the hands of every individual. This is now a declared right. With that right, there is a tremendous responsibility to share information and collaborate with others for the benefit of all.

Of course, as a powerful tool of expression, the Internet can also be used malevolently to express hatred, racism, bigotry, etc. and to malign other people, their thoughts or opinions. Of course, it can also be used to steal, spy, hack, and otherwise disrupt normal civilization.

So we also all have the responsibility to behave appropriately, fairly, and with dignity to each other on the Internet.

While I applaud the U.N. for declaring the Internet a human right, I would like to see this expanded to include both a right and responsibility—this to me would be more balanced and beneficial to building not only access, but also giving and tolerance.

(Photo Source: WorldVisionReport.org)

The Internet: A Right and a Responsibility

A Place for Answers

First there was Wikipedia and now there is Quora.

On January 15, 2011, Wikipedia celebrated it's 10 year birthday, and according to Bloomberg Businessweek, it now has more than 17 million entries (compared with only 120,000 for Encyclopedia Britannica) in 250 languages and is one of the most visited sites on the Internet. Moreover, the accuracy of the crowd-sourced Wikipedia has generally been found as good as traditional encyclopedias.

But despite the phenomenal growth of Wikipedia, a new site, Quora is finding a place for itself in online knowledge management, as one of the key question and answer (Q&A) destinations of the web (others being Answers.com, Yahoo Answers, and more--which were apparently found lacking by the founders of Quora).

According to Wired (May 2011), Quora is only 2 years old and already has about 200,000 people visiting the site each month. The approach of Quora is to create a searchable knowledge market based on merging verifiable facts with people's personal experiences and observations or what Wired calls "the large expanse between...the purely objective [e.g. Wikipedia] and the purely subjective [e.g. Facebook, Twitter, etc.]."

Quora is looking to capture what it believes is the "Ninety percent of information people have [that] is still in their heads and not on the web."

The site is also creating a community of people who participate in asking and answering questions, and can select to follow topics and people of interest, and vote on whether answers are helpful ("voted up") or not to push answers up or down the page.

Similar to Wikipedia, answers can be "trimmed, corrected, or otherwise massaged by one of the rigorous volunteers" (of which their are now more than 100--Quora only has 18 employees). Answers are "written for the world, and for anyone who has that same question for the rest of time." And even questions can get "extensively reworded."

Wired asks is this just another popularity contest on the web or self-promotion for the self-proclaimed experts? One of the volunteers responds that "This isn't about job searching. It's not about raising money. Most of us who are heavy users can already do that without help. It's a sense of sharing what we now, and it's being part of a community."

Of course, while critics may call them pedantic or petty, the Quora participants are on a mission to build a vital and timeless knowledge repository--"the modern-day equivalent to the Library of Alexandria", so perhaps the people chic has to be balanced with information usability.

On January 21, 2011, Tech Crunch awarded Quora "best new startup for 2010."

It will be interesting to see where this goes...the funny thing for me was that I ended looking up Quora up in Wikipedia. :-)

A Place for Answers

Domain Names Demystified

It's so hard to come up with just the right domain name, especially when the landscape already seems so busy.

How are you to know what's already out there, what's available, and what's original?

Panabee.com is a "brainstorming engine for finding cool names and checking domain availability."

I tested it out and it gives you lots of useful information, including:

- Interesting variations (by prepend, append, swapping, even spelling backwards, and more)

- Related terms (each of which can be clicked on to continue brainstorming a name)

- Translations (in over 2 dozen languages from Afrikaans to Welsh)

- Alternate endings (including .net, .biz, .org, country extensions, etc.)

- Inspiration from social media (such as Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia, and Google--entries, terms, and mentions)

In terms of the availability of suggestions, these are indicated in a dashboard type fashion with green :-) or red :-( to make it easy to see what's what.

Finally, there is a link to Go Daddy to "buy [the Domain Name] now for $7.49 before somebody else does."

Overall, I found Panabee to be a useful tool to come up with innovative domain names and thereby help us start up new and exciting ventures on the web.

Domain Names Demystified