TWTR | Bach Seat

Tag Archive for TWTR

RB | January 2, 2014

Comments Off

Tech Titans Crush Patent Reform

Jeff John Roberts at GigaOM reports there is a battle going on in Washington DC over patent reform. Some in DC are attempting to rewrite the broken patent system. Under the current patent laws, what the author calls the struggling old guard firms can exploit the patent system to abuse monopolies over basic software concepts from decades ago. The result has been to smother start-ups and weigh down vibrant parts of the tech economy with frivolous lawsuits; lawyers get fat at the expense of those who are building real businesses.

The latest push by Congress to fix the software patent problem suffered a setback after Congress allowed Microsoft and IBM to gut a key House bill that would have made it easier for victims to push back. TechEye explains that the “covered business method” (CBM) program drew the ire of Microsoft (MSFT) and IBM (IBM). The changes proposed would have sped up the method for the Patent Office to get rid of low-quality software patents. Under the reformed program, MSFT and IBM could not sue someone until the Patent Office considered if the patent was viable. TechEye reports that IBM flexed its political muscle (cash?) to stop the effort to expand the CBM program. An IBM spokesperson said that while “we support what Mr. Goodlatte’s trying to do on trolls, if the CBM is included, we’d be forced to oppose the bill.”

The upshot according to GigaOM is that for the second time in three years, the U.S. is poised to pass a law that will make cosmetic changes to the patent system without addressing the root cause — garbage software patents — that has made the system a mockery and a byword for legalized extortion.

The article claims that reformers shouldn’t despair quite yet. GigaOM cites sources close to the legislative process that think real reform could still happen if powerful senators prevail and if opponents outgun Microsoft and its allies in the grubby money and lobbyist game. GigaOM lays out how the reform was de-railed.

Money Talks in the House

The chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R. Va.), was scheduled to bring his much-touted patent bill for a vote. The bill arrived on schedule — but it was a neutered version.

A key provision, which would have provided a way to challenge software patents at the Patent Office, is no longer in the bill, which Fat cat money passed 33-5 vote by the committee. The change is significant, the author says because it means victims of patent bullies must still pay millions to challenge the patents in federal court or, as most do, simply swallow hard and pay a licensing fee.

Mr. Goodlatte’s decision to drop the provision is a victory for IBM and Microsoft, which have stacks of old software patents that provide licensing revenue even as their product lines sputter. It’s also a victory for trolls, which the article says are shell companies backed by private equity firms and lawyers that use patents (often obtained from Microsoft and others under a “privateering” arrangement) to wage ruinous legal war against everyone from Martha Stewart to individual users. (rb- Click here to read about IBM’s efforts to Patent Patent Trolling)

According to reports, the change to the Goodlatte bill came after intense lobbying from groups linked to Microsoft, IBM, and others. The account was confirmed by a source close to Google (GOOG) and other groups that pushed for the provision to challenge software patents.

“They outspent the living shit out of us,” said the source, who did not want to be named. He said that the companies spent heavily to lobby Democrats on the Committee and freshman Republicans, forcing Mr. Goodlatte to remove the provision rather than seeing it voted down at this stage.

A source with a lobbying group allied with Microsoft said the software giant’s role had been overstated, and that the change in the bill was less about money than it was about “shoe leather” lobbying.

Patent reform in the Senate

“If we had a quarter of the people who opposed SOPA supporting this anti-patent troll law, we’d win,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told the author. Mr. Schumer was joined by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, to talk patent reform and his up his bill to take on trolls, which he said are “preying on New York’s technology industry.”

Mr. Schumer is pushing a bill that includes the key provision about software patents that was stripped from the House bill. Schumer’s support is significant, not only because he carries clout in the Senate, but because he succeeded in including a similar provision aimed at frivolous financial services patents in the America Invents Act of 2011.

Other patent reform bills are circulating in the Senate including similar bills from Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Va.) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tx.). According to the source tied to Google, Mr. Leahy has signaled that his bill is a “Christmas tree,” meaning other politicians can hang their preferred provisions atop it; the bill that will ultimately get a vote on the Senate floor will likely contain a provision to challenge software patents.

Washington insiders said patent legislation is one of the few bipartisan initiatives available to members of Congress, who are eager to notch legislative achievements before the mid-term campaign season begins next summer. This means that the bills are expected to go to a full floor vote in the House and Senate by early 2014 and that a markup session on a final bill will take place in the spring — the only question is which version will prevail.

The endgame

“There’s months to go till conference committee,” said the source close to the reform lobby, predicting that the balance of power will tilt towards the software patent reform camp, as Google and others ramp up lobbying efforts. The source tied to Microsoft, unsurprisingly, panned this prediction and declared that challenges to software patents are now a “third rail” that most in Congress don’t want to touch.

The outcome will be determined in large part by money, and whether Google and the other companies that recognize the harm caused by software patents (Twitter (TWTR) is another) are willing to seize the chance at reform that is within their grasp.

Today, attitudes have changed after a steady parade of patent horror stories: Boston University using a 1997 patent to sue Apple and seek an iPhone ban; a troll using a 1998 patent from a Holocaust foundation to shake down the New York Times; a troll lawyer who boasts he likes to “go thug,” and is pressing an extortion campaign against hundreds of companies.

All of this has led everyone from small app developers to President Obama to suggest the patent system is out of hand. After years of asking defendants to take it on faith that the system is working, it’s now up to Microsoft and others to justify that their ancient software patents — which award 20-year monopolies in a fast-moving industry — do more good than harm.

rb-

While I’m not a lawyer, this seems pretty messed up to me. But that is the magic of Democracy, we get the leadership we elect.

Congress uses cartoon video to explain the problems with patent trolls and “legalized extortion” (gigaom.com)

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: 2014, Business, GOOG, Google, IBM, Microsoft, MSFT, Patent, Patent Office, Politics, Reform, Troll, Twitter, TWTR, USPTO

RB | July 2, 2013

Comments Off

Social Media – It’s All About Me

Social media sites such as Facebook (FB) and Twitter are a narcissist magnet, according to recent study from the University of Michigan. The U-M researchers published their results online in Computers in Human Behavior.

TechEye says the Michigan researchers found that college students and their adult counterparts use social media in differing ways to bolster their egos and control perceptions of others, the report suggests. Elliot Panek, a University of Michigan researcher said that social networking is about making your image, how you are seen, and also checking on how others respond to this image.

College-age students love using Twitter to make their opinions and views seem important. He told CBC News that college students social media tool of choice is the megaphone of Twitter. “Young people may over evaluate the importance of their own opinions,” Professor Panek said. “Through Twitter, they’re trying to broaden their social circles and broadcast their views about a wide range of topics and issues.”

Adults who show narcissism tend to prefer Facebook, which works in the same way. Middle-aged adults usually have already formed their social selves and they use social media to gain approval from those who are already in their social circles. According to Mr. Panek, Facebook serves narcissistic adults as a mirror. “It’s about curating your own image, how you are seen, and also checking on how others respond to this image,” he said.

So what’s wrong with being a little narcissistic? Plenty. The traits associated with the disorder can stunt the development of close, long-term relationships. What’s more, highly narcissistic people are more likely to react aggressively to criticism and to carry out actions that promote themselves at the expense of others. On the upside, narcissism also correlates with higher self-esteem and low anxiety

Those findings confirm the conventional wisdom that Twitter is the more youthful, millennial, me-centric social network. Facebook is the province of older people who like to showcase pictures of pasta dishes or post status updates about their kids. We’d hazard to say it’s a crutch for people who can’t get out of the house much, but still, seek validation from their peers. Incidentally, the median age of Facebook users has risen from 38 to 41 over the last few years, according to various social media studies. A recent spate of alarmist headlines suggested that teenagers may, in fact, be ditching Facebook.

rb-

Do you like me now?

Do Narcissists Use Twitter and Facebook More Than Other People? (news.health.com)

Category: Social Networking | Tags: 2013, Facebook, FB, Narcissism, Social media, Twitter, TWTR, University of Michigan

RB | September 1, 2012

Comments Off

Is Cisco buying Twitter followers for CSO?

Brad Reese at BradReese.com writes that it seems ailing network giant Cisco (CSCO) has bought Twitter followers for Chief Strategy Officer Padmasree Warrior. Mr. Reese asks if Cisco purposely violate the Twitter rules that forbid the purchasing of accounts to gain followers?

Mr. Reese points to information from TwitterAudit which exposes Twitter fraud is reporting: Approximately half-a-million (509,426) of the Twitter followers of the network gear maker’s Chief Strategy Officer, Padmasree Warrior, are fake Twitter accounts.

“Each audit takes a random sample of 5000 Twitter followers for a user and calculates a score for each follower. This score is based on number of tweets, date of the last tweet, and ratio of followers to friends. We use these scores to determine whether any given user is real or fake. Of course, this scoring method is not perfect but it is a good way to tell if someone with lots of followers is likely to have increased their follower count by inorganic, fraudulent, or dishonest means.“

Mr. Reese writes he ran the following Status People check on the 1.4 million Twitter followers of Cisco Chief Strategy Officer, Padmasree Warrior:

The practice of buying Twitter followers to boost your reputation in an online network seems to be mainstream business, as any Google search on the topic will show. It has also been covered by the New York Times, “Buying Their Way to Twitter Fame” Network World, “Inside the real economy behind fake Twitter accounts” and even mentioned on NPR.

rb-
I signed up to follow the networking business’s CSO to see what competitive insights I could gain from the CSO. The tweets coming out of the Cisco Chief Strategy Officer was were often so pointless that they seemed to be coming from a 16-year-old and not a key business person in the IT world.

The tweets were so pointless I just ignored them, now I am going to expend the effort to actually unfollow Warrior …..

Done – So now Cisco you will have to buy another Twitter follower to follow pointless tweets for your business leaders – Now get back to making great network gear.

Cisco CEO John Chambers Chases Off Yet Another Heir To His Throne (CSCO) (businessinsider.com)

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: 2012, Business, Cisco, CSCO, fake Twitter accounts, Twitter, TWTR

RB | February 2, 2012

Comments Off

Never Check Email First Thing In The Morning

– Updated 03-18-12 – Science writer David Bradley on his blog ScienceText also recommends, “Avoid social networking and email first thing.” I know it works for me, I walk around and talk to staff before I get tangled up in the work everybody else wants me to do.

—

Sid Savara a widely regarded personal development trainer published 7 Reasons You Should Never Check Email First Thing In The Morning at his site sidsavara.com.

#1 – Ignorance Is Bliss … fully Productive – When it comes to email, ignorance is bliss. That’s why if you’ve got something important you want to make progress on, the author offers these four words for success:

Don’t check your email – As soon as you get in, work on something important for 30-45 minutes, and only then check your email. If you can stand it, wait even longer. The article suggests that as long as you’re ignorant of everything else that’s going on outside, you can concentrate on what you want to work on.

Any new information you get can cause you to get distracted.

#2 – It’s Not Your Todo List – Mr. Savara you know what is most important for you to work on the first thing in the morning you should go ahead and do it! By checking email, you risk doing what someone else wants you to do. Or more bluntly, when you check your inbox, the emails you get are a to-do list someone else makes for you.

Who is in charge of your time – you, or the person emailing you?

#3 – It’s An Excuse To Lack Direction – The author says that checking email is a low-priority activity and that you may be checking email first thing in the morning because your to-do list has gotten off track somewhere. He argues that when you don’t have a clear list of priorities, checking email becomes an urgent activity that you do at the expense of your important ones.

#4 – Reaction vs “Proaction” – When you check your email, you end up with more work to do – and because we’re in “check email” mode, we start replying to them at the expense of the task we were just working on. Rather than actively setting an agenda, email forces you to react to items as they come in – regardless of their true priority.

Mr. Savara says he prefers taking proactive actions. Work on the things that are important to you, regardless of whether they’re urgent or simply at the top of your inbox. Stop wasteful actions, and focus on productive actions instead.

#5 – Searching For Excuses Blindly checking email (or Twitter, or Facebook, or any number iTime wasters) is usually just searching for an excuse to not do the work that must be done according to the author. Don’t fall into that trap. Don’t give yourself an out by checking your email for an excuse to fail. He urges, don’t check your email – acknowledge the task you need to get done and do it.

Cross that bridge – it’s not going away.

#6 – There’s No Set Time Limit – Meetings get a bad rap for being a waste of time – but at least you usually know how long a meeting will last. But do you know how long you’re going to spend on email once you open your inbox, odds are you don’t know – or you’ll underestimate it.

The problem is, checking email only takes a minute but you can get sucked into follow-up activities that result from opening your email, and there’s no way of knowing how much time these will take. You have a set time limit for how many productive hours you have in a day don’t let email suck you in and cause you to devote more time to it than you can afford.

#7 – It Builds Expectation – A lot of people say, “But I have to check my email! People expect a response from me in the morning!” The author believes that there are some requests that need immediate responses, but they’re much less frequent than you might think.

He argues that people expect a response from you in the morning because you’ve always responded first thing in the morning and you’ve built that expectation. The more often you check email, the more often people will expect you to check it. Just stop checking it first thing in the morning, and people won’t expect it anymore.

Mr. Savara recommends the following email rules:

Only check if there is something specific you are looking for. Most important – don’t go fishing around. Check it with a specific plan, a specific email you’re looking for from a specific person.
Separate low-value emails via filters (“rules” in outlook) or separate email addresses so you don’t even see them in your inbox when you check
Set a time limit. Commit to checking for 5 minutes, just to look for that one piece of information – and have your exit strategy ready. Before you open your inbox, decide what you’ll do if 1) the email is there 2) the email isn’t there 3) the email is incomplete. Don’t be reactionary – proactively decide what action you will take based on the outcomes you expect.

Become Master of your Email Inbox (carolinebeavon.com)

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: 2012, AAPL, Apple, Business, email, Facebook, FB, Gmail, GOOG, Google, iPhone, sidsavara.com, Social media, Time management, Twitter, TWTR

RB | August 4, 2011

Comments Off

10 Security Reasons to Quit Facebook

Joan Goodchild wrote an article for CSO Online that said Baby Boomers quit Facebook faster than they join based on information from Inside Facebook. The data indicate that after a huge growth in Facebook membership among the over-55 age group that same demographic began to defect in large numbers, just months after signing up. The CSO Online article quotes Scott Wright, a security consultant based in Canada and runs the site streetwise-security-zone.com says Boomers leave Facebook because they have discretion.

10 ways Facebook does not allow discretion

Here are 10 ways that Facebook does not allow for discretion, driving Boomer permanently off of Facebook.

1. Your Privacy is History Mr. Wright recalled an academic claim that the notion of privacy differs widely among generations. “The 20-something view of privacy is basically that their parents not see what they are doing. That’s about it,” he said. Apparently, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg agrees. He claims that openly sharing information with many people is today’s social norm. He went on to say “We view it as our role in the system to constantly be innovating and be updating what our system is to reflect what the current social norms are.” Many have translated this to mean Facebook doesn’t think its users want much privacy, and the policies of the site show that view. “If you can’t maintain privacy online and off, then you can’t speak freely,” said Bethan Tuttle, an Washington-based independent consultant and privacy advocate. Tuttle says in the article that the massive and quick growth Facebook has experienced, coupled with a lack of privacy-centric leadership has left end-user privacy as casualty.

2. They don’t have your best interests in mind Tom Eston, creator of the website socialmediasecurity.com points out, the business model of Facebook and Twitter, is to make user information as public as possible to generate new ways to make money. Mr. Eston said in the article;

They are really startups if you think about it. They don’t have a true business model … Their philosophy is the more you share, the more information they have to make money with. With that in mind, can you really count on them to protect you?

And do you know just how much information you are sharing that can be used not only by Facebook, but by the application developers that create those fun quizzes and games? Wright says most people don’t. (I wrote about this problem here).

3. Frequent redesigns affect privacy settings Mr. Wright in the CSO Online article said,

Just when people figure out the privacy settings on Facebook, they go and change them again … It always seems like it is being done in everyone’s best interest, but if you really examine it, they have never done anything other than to try to get people to share more information.

Facebook redesigns often make public, and searchable, certain user information that was previously private, and many of the features you can make private are left public unless you go in and adjust your privacy settings. This is no small task, according to Ms. Tuttle, “I am really good online but it took me several tries to get my Facebook privacy settings where I needed them to be.”

4. Social engineering attacks are getting more targeted Most Facebook users have received messages on their wall asking “Have you seen this video?” or “Is this you in this photo?” By clicking on the link, the user runs the risk of being infected by malware. These are known as social engineering attacks, and they are becoming more sophisticated said Mr. Wright. “They are becoming very targeted. Even seasoned security professionals are falling for them,” he said. The more information you share, coupled with a decrease in privacy, only means it is even easier for cyber criminals to get information about you that can be used to trick you into clicking on a bad link.

5. You can’t trust the ads Most web users think advertisements are harmless, unfortunately, some contain malicious links. One common scenario involves a pop-up from the ad that claims your computer is infected and prompts you to download software to fix it. Instead of helpful software, you end up downloading something nasty. This is now commonly known in the security community as “scareware,” and it’s still a very effective way to snare unsuspecting users.

6. Spam Spam claiming to be from Facebook has increased according to the article. “I think it’s a security concern,” said Mr. Eston. “Mostly because spammers can use that vulnerability to make you think the message is coming from Facebook when it is not. Many users simply wonder “Why is Facebook sending me this?” and instinctively open the message and log in to what turns out to be a fake screen that steals credentials.

7. You don’t really know your friends The author cites a report from security firm Cloudmark which concluded that close to 40 percent of new Facebook profiles are fakes. Having lots of friends is dangerous because it opens you up to more security risks. Mr. Wright said those who get targeted for hacking are the users who have lots of friends (here is an example). The more friends you have, the more reach a criminal will have when he breaks into your profile and sends out a bad link to everyone.

8. You can’t help yourself from being dumb The attention around the site pleaserobme.com brought to light the safety concerns around social networking. Pleaserobme aggregates the Twitter feeds of people who play Foursquare, a location-sharing application. The problem is while playing the game, many users are also publicly broadcasting that their home is likely unattended and a good “opportunity” (as the site terms it) for thieves. As Ms. Tuttle put it, you need to think about what you are doing and many people are not. You’re putting yourself out there in potentially dangerous ways, particularly if you don’t know all of your “friends” that well.

9. The great unknown CSO Online says there is a lot of speculation about a Facebook IPO and future business strategy. What does this mean for users? Mr. Wright said some fear it means an increase loss of privacy as the social networking site inevitably looks for ways to make money by offering up valuable user information to advertisers and developers. Mr. Wright said,

One of the things I find most interesting is that there are still many people who are scared to death of social networking sites. These are usually the people who don’t see value in them. In the end, they may be the wisest of us all.

10. Ex’s, creeps and parents Facebook is making it possible for people to be cyber stalked, even if they aren’t friends anymore, said Mr. Eston. Although the physical and virtual connections are broken, having mutual friends makes it easier for your ex to keep tabs on you. The same goes for any creepy guy or girl you are trying to avoid. Or you may get a friend request from a parent, which Mr. Wright claims many 20-something users consider the worst thing that could ever happen in the history of social networking. “That is a big driver for quitting,” he said. “Once the parent friends some of these people they immediately think ‘I’ve got to get out of this!”

What do you think?

Loading ...

Germany challenges Facebook on facial recognition, citing EU privacy laws (engadget.com)

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Social Networking | Tags: 2011, Cloudmark, Facebook, FB, Foursquare, Mark Zuckerberg, Privacy, Social media, Twitter, TWTR

« Older Entries Recent Entries »

Bach Seat

Tag Archive for TWTR