news

Can Larry reboot Google?

Can Larry reboot Google?: Bill Gates got to this point with Microsoft, tried to re-whip the intelligence of his early days, failed, and went on to be a philanthropist.

Steve Jobs was fired before Apple could get to this point. He spent years in the wilderness, came back and somehow got Apple to turn the corner. Probably because he had no reason not to fire the losers who accumulate in BigCo’s. There was a huge purge at Apple in 1997 and 1998.

Larry Page and Mark Zuckerberg are there now. Neither of them has made it over the hump. Will they be Steve or will they be Bill? Or something else. [Something else… if anything.]
Source: Scripting News

Google’s reaction to Kindle Fire

Google’s reaction to Kindle Fire:

You’re not the licensee Droid is looking for. Google’s reaction to Kindle Fire speaks volumes about its goals for Android. Kindle Fire is based on Android, and will run Android applications. Android has been struggling in the tablet space, so you’d expect that Google would be delighted to have Amazon on the Android bandwagon. But you’d be wrong. Let’s look at the press release Google issued today to welcome Amazon to the Android family. Wait a minute, there is no press release. Okay, so let’s look on the Google blog. Nothing at all. Maybe a tweet from Andy Rubin? Dead silence.

&

Slouching toward Bethlehem. One revolution I’m sure is coming is the remaking of the print publishing industry. As I’ve said before (link), once about 20% of the reading public has electronic devices, an established author can make more money bypassing print and selling direct through e-readers. I think the new Kindle line, and especially the entry-level Kindles at $99 and below, will finally push us past the 20% threshold. It will take a couple of years to play out, but this will force the long-awaited restructuring, or destruction, of the traditional book publishing industry.

[Book publishing is not entirely about the medium, although everyone likes to talk as if it is. It’s really about author services.]

It’s the Content Providers (or not)

It’s the Content Providers:

The Angry Drunk:

While the Netflix changes are certainly annoying, and the
messaging was less than stellar, we need to make sure to remember
where the blame ultimately lies  —  with the content
providers. Until they decide to get with the program content
distributors like Netflix and Apple will always be at their mercy
and customers will continue to suffer.

and

The answers to these ques­tions, and I believe the dri­ving force behind the Netflix changes all involve one group: the con­tent providers. The tech press some­times seems to think that dis­trib­u­tors like Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Redbox, Blockbuster, etc. just pull this con­tent mag­i­cally out of their asses. They ignore the fact that there are pow­er­ful movie stu­dios and record labels that are obsessed with main­tain­ing con­trol over their prod­uct dis­tri­b­u­tion and are scared shit­less over dig­i­tal dis­tri­b­u­tion. How soon we for­get that a major Netflix con­tent provider, Starz, recently told Netflix to piss up a rope and took their ball home.

[It’s complex and battle between the content providers is always more complex that it seems on the outside. Amazon is getting into publishing, publishers are getting into selling retail. What if Amazon decided to start producing some of the products they sell (besides the Kindle et al)? It is also easy to decide that the content providers are screwing everything up for you and me… it’s never that simple.]
Source: Daring Fireball

The Cloud’s My-Mom-Cleaned-My-Room Problem – Alexis Madrigal

The Cloud’s My-Mom-Cleaned-My-Room Problem – Alexis Madrigal:

Netflix, Twitter, and Google make unasked-for, unanticipated, and unstoppable change in their products, which also happen to be our work and play spaces.

and

But the freedom of usage that defined personal computing does not extend to the world of parental computing. This isn’t a bug in the way that cloud services work. It is a feature. What we lose in freedom we gain in convenience. Maybe the tradeoff is worth it. Or maybe it’s something that just happened to us, which we’ll regret when we realize the privacy, security, and autonomy we’ve given up to sync our documents and correspondence across computers.

[The thing to remember is that we do not have to give up one to have the other. We can have document syncing etc. without living “in our parents house” simply by paying for the services. We can have our privacy and our freedom. But it has a cost.]

Cringely Called It

Cringely Called It:

Cringely, back in February:

Then there’s Meg Whitman, who expected at this point to have
resigned from the HP board to spend all her time running
California as governor. But that didn’t happen, so now what is
she to do? You can only get so many pedicures. She’ll eventually
get around to hip-checking Apotheker and taking his job.

Can’t get more accurate with a prediction than that.

[Good one!]
Source: Daring Fireball

FaceTime calls are encrypted, HIPAA compliant

FaceTime calls are encrypted, HIPAA compliant:

This isn’t the issue from last fall, but Apple addressed questions regarding FaceTime security to ZDNet. An Apple representative assured the site that the FaceTime conversation stream is encrypted from end to end, and each FaceTime session has unique session keys for each user.

What this does is make FaceTime HIPAA compliant as long as the wireless network being used utilizes WPA2 Enterprise security with 128-bit AES encryption. HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) is the U.S. standard for electronic health care transactions designed to keep these records secure and protect patient privacy. With the protocols being followed, those in the healthcare industry can apply for grants for Apple gear since HIPAA compliance is required.

[For Lisa…]
Source: The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

On Netflix

Folks keep asking why the old DVD service will gain a new company name… Qwickster

My take? They’re just “riding down” the DVD through the mail thing until infrastructure and services support streaming for us all… and by then Netflix will be a “cable company”. Therefore, they don’t want that “ebbing” business associated with the Netflix brand. Hmmm.

Streaming in some forms works very nicely. One version provided by Cablevision (much as I can’t stand them) which I’ve only tried on the smallest of screens (my phone), has an app that while you’re on your home network will allow you watch whatever is “on the air” so to speak. It works nicely.

To rely on that same net connection (amazing that it can be so poor at some things and yet manage the above) for a more generalized stream of HD movies etc. is to plan long in advance, be uncertain of your plans, and hopeful that streaming means “local caching”. If doesn’t, it doesn’t really work.

That said, I almost never watch a movie… so none of this really impacts me.

All in all, Netflix clearly made a mistake when they gave streaming away for free. There ain’t no thing… etc.

The Age of Mechanical Reproduction

The Age of Mechanical Reproduction:

Paul Ford, back in July, a lovely gut-wrenching piece for The Morning News. Read it, you won’t regret it. Then, when you’re done, read today’s postscript.

[Many years ago I had a discussion with Lisa about “how far to go” to have a baby. What interventions were cool, and what was “it wasn’t meant to be” for us. This brought all of it back… and 6 years of incredible joy. I wonder if my answer would be different knowing what I know…]
Source: Daring Fireball

I am a job creator who creates no jobs

I am a job creator who creates no jobs: I should add that I am in no danger of being caught in the net of President Obama’s proposed millionaires’ tax. I pay the accountants a few thousand dollars, and they make sure I am not paying more in taxes than I should be. (Note to the IRS: They do this in ways that are conservative, entirely above-board and so innocuous that they should not attract your interest in the slightest.)

While there is something absurd about being a one-man corporation, it’s a rational response to an irrational tax code. If lawmakers got serious about tax reform that removed loopholes, the money spent on accountants and actuaries (valuable though they are) could instead be used to grow the economy or to pay the federal debt. But that’s a matter for another day.

At the moment, the Ink-Stained Inc. case study, should the Harvard Business School wish to study it, is a reminder to be skeptical of the “job creator” argument in the tax debate. “It’s a good example of the murkiness of what we mean by small business and the connection to jobs,” William Gale, co-director of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution’s Tax Policy Center, told me. “There’s sort of this notion of small-business innovation and job creation that just doesn’t necessarily hold.”

That’s even more so with Obama’s “Buffett Rule,” under which millionaires would have to pay a higher tax rate than a typical middle-class worker. As a practical matter, most already do. Gale said the rule would raise the taxes on only a few thousand people, perhaps as few as 1,000.

In a nation of more than 300 million, that’s not going to make a dent in job creation. Even the data analysts at Ink-Stained Inc. could figure out that one — that is, if we had any data analysts.

[It comes down to… if politicians are talking… they’re lying.]

You Have Every Right to Photograph That Cop

You Have Every Right to Photograph That Cop: “Taking photographs and video of things that are plainly visible in public spaces is a constitutional right — and that includes the outside of federal buildings, as well as transportation facilities, and police and other government officials carrying out their duties.

However, there is a widespread, continuing pattern of law enforcement officers ordering people to stop taking photographs or video in public places, and harassing, detaining and arresting those who fail to comply. The ACLU, photographer’s groups, and others have been complaining about such incidents for years — and consistently winning in court. Yet, a continuing stream of incidents of illegal harassment of photographers and videographers makes it clear that the problem is not going away.”

[It’s a huge mess. From my perspective this problem has grown greatly over the years…]