Geek News Central is the technical site for Geeks. We Spin tech for the common man. With a Family of Tech Shows and Content.



Archive for June, 2010

Why I Don’t Trust Online Voting

Posted by susabelle at 2:19 PM on June 24, 2010

Every fall, we start to hear about a bigger push for online voting for our major elections.  I am one of those in the category of being firmly against online voting.  There is too much room for things to go dreadfully wrong, with even less hope of fixing a problem if one occurs.

I mean, we can’t even get online polls right, for the most part, even if procedures and methods are in place to prevent spamming the vote count.  This week’s controversy involves Oprah Winfrey’s “Your OWN Show” contest, a voting event that allows visitors to the site to submit votes for different people who’d like to compete for their own show on Oprah’s new television network, OWN, set to launch next year.  For several hours, a particular contestant’s vote button script was “different” than the other contestants, allowing her to rack up votes at 1923 votes per minute, bringing her quickly and questionably in the lead.  Oprah’s people are, of course, “investigating” the incident, and the script has been adjusted to match the other contestants’ scripts, thereby leveling the playing field.

But who’s to say that the script couldn’t be altered again, for one contestant or another?  This kind of hacking is not particularly difficult, it seems, which leaves these types of contest open to all kinds of discrepancies in actual numbers.  Anyone who watches and votes for American Idol knows what an unfair process it is; a single person can send in as many votes in the overnight hours as they want through SMS messages from their cell phone.  Each vote is not necessarily a unique person.

And even if the intent is to keep the votes to one per person, there are always ways around that, and I don’t see online official voting to be immune from such practices.  There is always a way to hack, always a way to game the system.  Online voting for our government officials doesn’t sound any more legitimate than all the “voting” on websites to rank web pages or choose winners of contests.

And honestly, I don’t know that we’ll ever get to a point where we can trust online voting for elected officials.  It just doesn’t seem possible.

So, Exactly How Much do App Developers Make on Their Hard Work?

Posted by susabelle at 1:45 PM on June 24, 2010

So, exactly how much does an app developer make creating apps for the iPhone?  The answer might just surprise you.

According to Tomi T Ahonen at the Community Dominates Brands blog, development of an app costs an average of $35,000, and income for that app in a one-year period is about $682 after Apple takes its cut.  This means to break even on the cost of development of the app in the first place could take 51 years.

That’s a pretty shocking figure.  And while there are some developers out there making millions, there are many more that have pretty much lost their shirts creating apps for the iPhone.

Being a bottom-line, gotta-make-money-or-what’s-the-point kind of gal, these figures are pretty shocking to me.  Why would anyone even bother to make an app, when the income potential is non-existence?  How do you pay yourself back for your time, effort, and make enough cash to fund future development so you can upgrade your app later?  Seems like a losing battle.  And it certainly doesn’t help that Apple has such arbitrary and capricious methods for approving (and disapproving) apps that are submitted.

I admit I’m not economist, but it seems to me this is a no-win for most developers.  There’s no incentive for doing it.  So why are developers continuing to work in this environment?

I do recommend reading Tomi’s other blog posts about how to monetize yourself with development, especially his entry on where the biggest potential growth is (and it might surprise you too), The Digital Klondyke, inside the Cyber Eldorado. Why YOU should go mobile now and fast.

Garageband.com shutting down

Posted by Mike Dell at 9:58 AM on June 24, 2010

It’s a sad day for Podcasters and podcast listeners who enjoyed the podsafe music from GarageBand.com. I got this email this morning:

It’s been over ten years since we started helping discover independent music on the ol’ interwebs. Things have changed a lot since then. Most of those changes have been good and some of them have been bad. Some changes are just bitter-sweet.

It’s with this bitter-sweetness that we are announcing today that Garageband.com will be discontinued as of July 15th, 2010.

The landscape of how music is discovered and delivered has changed drastically over the last decade and we are proud to have been a huge part of that change — first with Garageband.com and then with iLike.com and beyond. Sadly, that landscape will not include Garageband.com anymore.

Link your account to iLike: (action required)
If you want to continue to make your music available for streaming or download on iLike.com and the iLike application on Facebook, please go to iLike.com and login with your Garageband username and password by July 15th, 2010. This will automatically link your account to iLike so we can port your music, profile photo, and biography to iLike.com.

Finally, if you have recently made a purchase on Garageband.com and would like a refund, please email refunds@iLike-inc.com to request a refund. Valid refund requests must be received no later than July 31st, 2010.

Sincerely,

The Garageband and iLike team

It looks like iLike will keep going on, but back in the day (2004) when I started podcasting, Garageband.com was one of my #1 sources for podsafe music to play in my podcast. I will miss them!

YouTube Honors my Show with a Special Feature!

Posted by geeknews at 8:52 AM on June 24, 2010

Well how much do they love me, well they love me so much that they have created a way for you to show your appreciation during the show. All you have to do is go to YouTube play podcast, and click on the soccer ball. Make sure you listen to the full 90 minute show and keep the Soccer ball clicked it will add immense enjoyment to your viewing experience.

Thanks to Tech Crunch for the heads up on this!

Is Content Demand Being Met?

Posted by tomwiles at 8:38 AM on June 24, 2010

Is Content Demand Being Met?New technology always disrupts. This has always been true, whether it was the invention of the wheel, the automobile, or modern electronics. With each new disruption, interactive business and social commerce is disturbed. Established business and social models are suddenly rendered partially or fully dysfunctional. For every new disruptive technology that comes along, an old business model is broken and new opportunities are created.

It has often been noted that people and organizations both don’t like change. There are some basic reasons at play that make this true.

In the workplace our brains go through an initial learning curve and automates much of the work we do so that we don’t have to continually think about it in detail. Introduction of a new disruptive program or process forces people to relearn what they already knew how to do in a different way, and thus they often become frustrated with it until they absorb and automate the changes.

Organizational change can be far more difficult, and often proves to be impossible. There’s this thing called “corporate culture” that is both a blessing and a curse for organizations. When a new employee comes to work into an existing organization, they quickly “learn the ropes” of what is expected of them. Existing employees often establish their own little kingdoms complete with pecking orders. These pecking orders are often enforced via subtle intimidation through systems of rewards and punishments. The person at the top, whoever is running the business, typically establishes corporate culture, whether they are aware of it or not. They tend to surround themselves with like-minded people they can dominate. In this sort of “look to the top” power environment it often becomes impossible for businesses to fully respond to changing market conditions, and the business dies. That’s why corporations have life cycles.

In today’s world, new disruptive technologies are coming along almost on a moment-by-moment basis.

Fast-forward to modern computers, wireless broadband and smart phone devices. Consumers of media demand the ability to consume the media of their choice wherever and whenever they want on the device of their choice. A tremendous amount of this demand has yet to be met. Old school content creators are reluctant to release their grip on breaking and broken appointment-based content delivery models. The reality is some of them will probably perish as they cling to those dead and dying delivery models. New ones will inevitably come in to fill the real-world demand.

Defamation Bill Introduced To UK Parliament

Posted by Andrew at 6:40 AM on June 24, 2010

Parliamentary copyright images are reproduced with the permission of Parliament. Photographed by Deryc Sands.

Lord Lester has introduced a Defamation Bill to the UK Parliament in order to clarify aspects of the the law regarding libel and slander.  One of its intents appears to be to clear up the current gray area for ISPs and forum owners with regard to defamatory postings and their responsibilities.

(This has been brought as a private member’s bill, which means that it’s not officially part of the Government’s legislative programme although it is seen as supportive.  The Bill will receive its second reading on 9th July which strangely is the first opportunity for the Bill to be debated and there’s a long way to go after that. You can read about the British legislative process here.)

Moving onto the geeky stuff, the Bill specifically refers to material stored “by electronic means” although any defence that the existing law didn’t cover the Internet has long been dismissed.

However,  the Bill does propose that there is a defence against defamatory action for “facilitators” provided that they remove the offending material with 14 days of being notified in writing.  A “facilitator” is considered to be someone concerned with “storage or transmission…of the content…and has no other influence or control”.  This is clearly aimed at ISPs, forum owners or any website that invites comments.  I would imagine it would also cover owners of websites that automatically show feeds from other sites.

On the other hand, “primary publishers” are authors or editors.  Interestingly an editor is defined as having “responsibility…for the decision to publish”.  This does raise one interesting question….if you are moderator and you approve a post which turns out to be libellous, it would appear that you may be classed as a primary publisher rather than a facilitator.  Hmm.

Other good points are that it appears that reports on scientific conferences will be protected (providing that they are “fair and accurate”) and the introduction of a “single publication” rule.  This means is that regardless of reprints or republications, the date of first publication is used for actions which can only happen once.  From an IT perspective, this means that ten year-old material downloaded today cannot create a fresh action (which is currently the case, apparently).

There’s some more comment courtesy of The Guardian newspaper, here and here.  And by the way, I’m not a lawyer.

YouTube wins Big against Viacom!

Posted by geeknews at 8:42 PM on June 23, 2010

Today the court handed down a big win for YouTube and a lot of other companies that have potentially infringing media on their websites. In two words the court agreed that YouTube has protection by “Safe Harbor” provisions as part of the DMCA. When you think about the thousands of videos being uploaded to not only YouTube, but the varies other sites around it is nearly impossible for any company to monitor all the uploads.

That is not to say that YouTube does not have to take videos down when informed by the copyright holders, only that YouTube is not financially liable for materials on their website that they are not aware of.

When you have millions of passionate people sharing moments from movies to music videos that they love that is a hard thing to stop. Copyright holders should be rejoicing that people love their content and learn that it will be nearly impossible to control where their media is distributed. While I believe people should be able share moments of material in accordance with fair use standards, I can sympathize with media creators frustrations when whole bodies of work are stolen.

Media creators do have to get a grip that times have changed  embrace what is occurring,  instead of sending DMCA takedown notices. It makes a lot more sense to work with YouTube and others media sites to monetize that shared content.

While I know Viacom will fight this all the way to top of the court system, my hope is that YouTube will prevail when the decision is appealed and we can claim a final victory on the safe harbor provisions.

Some of the Lesser Known Internet Video Sources

Posted by Alan Buckingham at 5:22 PM on June 23, 2010

Since I cut the cable (well, actually the satellite) recently, I have prided myself on finding things to watch (legally) online.  This has lead to something of a quest for bookmarks to add to my Media Center PC.  I also thought that showing what I have found might be of interest to others thinking of doing the same thing.  Although, I must admit, when football season rolls around I WILL be reconnecting (C’mon you MUST have noticed my Firefox theme in the screenshots).

Everyone is familiar with most of the major sources for online video – You Tube, Hulu, Netflix and all of the network sites such as ABC and Comedy Central.  But there are many more sites on the web that fly under the radar of most surfers.  So, I thought I’d take you on a quick tour of three  that I have found.

Crackle


Crackle is Sony Pictures’ website.  They have many full-length movies, as well as clips of others.  There are also various full-length TV episodes and even some web “originals”.  The video quality is excellent and there is a full-screen option.

Clicker


Clicker also contains Movies, TV shows and Web Originals as well as throwing in music videos.  To borrow from their own words:

“Clicker is the complete guide to Internet Television. Our mission is to make it simple for you to find the right show, right now. Classic Cinema Online.”

Again, video quality is excellent and full-screen is available.

Classic Cinema Online


Classic Cinema Online is, honestly, not really my cup of tea.  But, there are many of you out there who love the old classic movies and I didn’t want to leave anyone out in this first installment of “TV without the cable”.

This site has hundreds of the old classic movies.  Many of the best ones, actually.  It even includes silent films.  There is supposedly chat, so you can talk to to other people while watching the same movie.  But, I can’t say I have tried, so I will leave that up to you.

Hope everyone found a site here they like, and please post your own finds in the comments.  I am always looking for new sources.

Alan Turing

Posted by Andrew at 4:09 PM on June 23, 2010

Today is the 98th anniversary of the birth Alan Turing, one of most brilliant minds of the 20th Century.  Born on was born on 23rd June 1912 in London, England, he is known as one of the fathers of modern computing, though his ideas for programmable computers were ahead of their time.

He is widely know for the test which bears his name – the Turing Test – which Alan Turing designed to test for machine intelligence. In the test, a person communicates in natural language via keyboard and screen with two hidden respondents, one human, one computer.  If the person cannot tell which of the respondents is the machine, the computer is said to have passed the Turing test.  So far no computer has consistently passed the test.

Turing is also famous for his work during the Second World War at Bletchley Park and the breaking of the German naval Enigma code.  In collaboration with Gordon Welchman, he designed an electromechanical machine called a “bombe” that eliminated unworkable Enigma settings, leaving only a few to be investigated by analysts.  He went on to make a several further contributions to the war effort in different areas.

Regrettably, in 1952, Turing was arrested, tried and convicted for homosexuality which at that time was a criminal offence.  As result, and despite his wartime record, his security clearance to work for the government was revoked.  Sadly, in 7 June 1954, he committed suicide, eating an apple laced with cyanide.

Happy Birthday, Alan.

Could Android Suffer The Fate Of Windows?

Posted by tomwiles at 7:21 PM on June 22, 2010

Windows AndroidThe beauty of Google Android is that it operates on a wide variety of devices that appeal to differing market segments, yet those devices can utilize the Android Market Place and run general apps written for Android. This is similar to what happened with Windows on personal computers. It’s an analogy worthy of exploration, however there are a few noteworthy differences that are actually rather revealing.

Android is nimble, stable and solid, unlike many attributes of the various versions of Windows. Over the years, something went horribly wrong with Windows. Is it possible that Android could eventually suffer the same fate?

Perhaps one difference is that phone manufacturers have a direct incentive to make certain that each Android phone model has a solid implementation. After all, phones simply have to work. Computer manufacturers, on the other hand, have often had a tendency to churn out new computer models without always fully vetting the hardware/Windows OS combination. Google seems to have taken the approach with Android of providing a basic, bare bones phone OS, whereas over the years Microsoft has taken the kitchen sink approach with Windows.

Another difference in the Android/Windows/open hardware analogy rests in the fact that Android is an embedded OS. Hardware manufacturers are forced to make it work. The better it works, the more phones they can sell. If a particular phone model is buggy, word spreads quickly and the model is a bust.

If a particular computer model has problems, its manufacturer often points the finger of blame at Microsoft, and Microsoft typically points back to the manufacturer, leaving the troubled consumer with a spinning head.

The consumer is also partly to blame. If you think about it, we tend not to look at particular computer models running Windows in the same way we look at particular phone models. We tend to look at boxes running Windows as just that – a box of hardware based on price.