Tag Archives: Law

Two Providers of Secure E-Mail Shut Down – NYTimes.com

Two Providers of Secure E-Mail Shut Down – NYTimes.com.

WORM storage for immutable E-Mail backups, or are they destroying that as well?  Sounds like prevention moving forward, and to willfully destroy previous emails, in light of this move, may be tantamount to obstruction of justice, if a subpoena is served at this point, to the clients.

[dfads params=’groups=1177,1178&limit=1&orderby=random’]

Mobile OS Patch to Improve Upon Critical Response Time to National Crisis

It sounds a bit odd, but all of this data out there needed for a particular event will be harnessed; however, in this case a vast amount of information has to be called for by whomever, then collected, reviewed manually for relevance and then quality,  analyzed manually, and put through facial recognition.

In this situation, time is against law enforcement, because every minute spent with the above process, is a minute wasted finding possible suspects.

If the Department of Homeland Security were to build an archive data warehouse for images and videos , then with assistance from Mobile OS companies to add an option to the existing share button to add images & video to upload to a national law enforcement archive, a relatively trivial patch e.g. for Android and iOS, part of the process battle is there. Also the user would have to opt in to send their media and therefore there are limited privacy issues.

Image and video facial recognition could start immediately and rerun incrementally based on new media uploaded as the trigger. If the user does allow the media to be shared, they can add an event name, or select from a DHS list, put notes if the user chooses, automatically date time stamp the media, optionally GEO stamped, and select anonymous or allow the sending the user’s contact info stored. Now the true human analysis work may begin without many manual steps.

Privacy, Eye Movement Technology, Twitter and Advertising

As I was reading my stream of tweets my brain started to wander and think about that new eye movement technology Samsung, and LG are/will utilize to change smartphone screens with your eye movements.  As I looked at words in the tweets, the idea occured to me that privacy laws will need to accommodate a new potential frontier in advertising, eye focus advertising.   If a person looks at a word in a tweet for 3 seconds,  all of that eye focus data, how a person of a certain demographic looks at a particular word, how long, possibly their facial expression,  index and abstract that information,  it could give the concept of advertising a whole new meaning.  Big marketing is watching what you’re watching.   Brave New World.

Press regulation in the U.K.: Royal Charter Applies to Internet

BBC News – Press regulation: How royal charter applies to internet.

In this article, I find it extremely interesting, and I see both sides of the coin.  On one side, we have a regulated press, where approved concepts and ideas are allowed to be expressed, even by the common blogger.  In the U.K. you need a license for a T.V., however, some of the rationale for this may be specifically for news or stories that are accurate comes back from a long history at the Associated Press, where news needed to be confirmed by three sources.  In addition, the history of the Assiociated Press is an interesting one.  If there was a ship from England entering the bay, people would take row boats out, and compete to get the news from the ship, so it was agreed to send one ship and share the news.

In essence, regulated news, maybe for political reasons, maybe to not ensure a panic to maintain a society in case of an emergency, after all, a thought, a single idea, as they say on the Internet can be believed to be true if articulated well, and go ‘virual’ as they say, and pass for believable, and something that was not true, may cause societal breakdown, to the extreme.  One case of this is the broadcast in the United States that caused a mild panic, because people thought it was a plausable story, it was 1938, and it was the War of the Worlds, appropriately coined a few years before world war.

An argument can be made to the contrary, which is one person may report a factual story, but yet, without government sanction, the story would have legal precident to be blocked, recended, and the person may be fined or jailed, depending on the story.  Is this good, is this a removal of such liberties as the United States has the freedom of speech, which this country was founded upon?  Is this now an archaic principle?  Only time will tell.

Today, an AI Application Can Take Action on Your Behalf: Good or Bad?

A neat idea, is if you give permission to a user for a specific action, an AI voice/text recognition programs could:

  • If your tagged ‘best friend’ texts you, let’s go out tonight, and your work calendar setup for parameters 8 AM to 7 PM, and both you and your ‘best friend’ are tagged as liking a restaurant, or have a frequent geography tag to a specific location, given permission to a calendar, AI may automatically call ahead a restaurant, and book a reservation, or email the resturant with the reservation.  Given permission, the AI, would also provide a preferred credit card to hold the reservation.
  • If you give the voice/text AI recognition program a spending limit, and you have a profile of a person on file, it’s their birthday, the AI program can automatically purchase something for the person, e.g. an e-card from a ‘preferred store’, or ‘reading’ the person’s profile, may dynamically send a gift using their preferences, using your preferred credit card on file, and get it to the person on time.
  • Based on your current Geo-tagged location, AI can suggest you attend a bar/restaurant based on you’re bosses, or on your pursued romantic interlude checkins; to increases your odds of promotion or romantic interlude, or both.

The ideas are endless what AI can do, the technology is out there, the rules, APIs, and applications are to be built on top of the AI APIs.  We live in an incredible, yet scary time. It’s important to set parameters, but one rule, one order of precedence, one parameter can make or break careers, relationships, and so on.  Tread carefully.  We are only human.

When Only Money Talks in SEO & Online Advertising

It seems to me in my last few years of experience, when you want to be heard on the Internet, you can have the best Keywords, Metadata, SEO Title, and Metadata, and your placement in the search IS only if you pay for the advertising to the company running the platform.  You actively pay for advertising, you go to the top of the list, and they tell you if you bid X you will be placed at #1 ranking. That should advance your hit rate in a calculation.  If you have a placement of 1, and a high click through rate on the search engine, that should also effect your placement in the search engine when you don’t advertise, if you have similar SEO keywords, metadata, and click through rate, because after all, the relevancy has not changed, so mathematically it should be at equilibrium.  It’s just how much you are paying that changes.  I will quote one of my favorite movies yet again, Moneyball.

Billy Beane: No! What’s the problem, Barry?
Scout Barry: We need three eight home runs, a hundred twenty R.B.I’s and forty seven…
Billy Beane: Aaahhh! The problem we’re trying to solve is that there are rich teams and there are poor teams, then there’s fifty feet of crap, and then there’s us. It’s an unfair game… We got to think differently.

 

People, we have to think differently, out of the box, if you want…full stop.  It’s like the Mofia is running the Advertising Online, muscling you, a shakedown for a payment to be heard, and if it only suits their political agenda to top off. We have two companies, with no disrespect, but it’s an oligopoly, essentially, Microsoft Ads Bing and Google Ads.  This is as close to anti-trust as possible, and although I think Google AdWords has an amazing platform, and in favor of both parties, because my mantra is all perspectives are valid, this is Ironic, in this case, it’s Microsoft who might have a case against Google in an Anti-trust suit, and I like them both.  Guess what, it’s a case for every single advertising agency, a class action law suit, which could even involve SEO Experts paid to help the advertisers.

Thanks goes to @JFGariepy, Sir J.-François Gariépy for sparking the idea.

Social Networks, Ring Fencing Data, and Regional Data Centers

I worked on a project where if there was communication between two parties within the same country not intended for ‘out of country’ consumption, that data needed to be housed in local DCs (Data Centers) for regulatory purposes. It occurs to me that many social networks have centralized data centers. What if on Twitter two people within the same country DM each other, direct message, regarding confidential financial information and that data is routed cross boarders and stored in a central location, say, in the U.S., would that social network be out of compliance with local statues regardless of if the user agreed to the social networks terms. Couldn’t the social networks at least be charged with aiding these potential criminals of avoiding their local country laws? I think this was bought up before but it reoccurred to me with a tweet I saw, Googles floating data center and virtual data center in North Carolina.

Is the Apple and Samsung Battle Really about Android verse iOS?

Is this just a question of Samsung verse Apple, or iOS verse Android, but Apple is not battling the U.S. company, Google, and Google is not defending it’s partner because it has its own internally acquired hardware vendor, Motorola Mobility?

Since Samsung is a foreign company, should it be protected under United States Antitrust regulations, and if so, do they apply?  If by taking Samsung out of the U.S. marketplace, would Apple monopolize the marketplace?  Is it a grey area, the current number of mobile hardware manufacturers, relative to their share in the market, and how much control Apple would have shaping the U.S. marketplace if Samsung was removed?  Are the mobile hardware and/or OS manufactures an Oligopoly or a Monopoly?  As an example article, here is a brief statement on Monopolies and Oligopolies, and examples of Oligopolies. U.S Antitrust Laws could apply, but this decision should at least be presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, and possibly in a different context.  Is this a hardware manufacturer issue, or a mobile Operating System issue?

I continually see news articles like, Apple wants ban on Samsung products, even more damages.  Here is a solid paper from a Law student at Fordham regarding Oligopolies and Antitrust Law.  It started to make me think, along with another article from CNN Money, Android races past Apple in smartphone market share.  In the article it mentions how RIMM and Nokia / Symbian fell in market share significantly, and the top two competitors are Apple and Android.  For me, these articles raised a few questions.  Clearly RIMM and Nokia/Symbian differ in form factor and feature capabilities, and have been outpaced by Apple and Android.  Google purchasing Motorola Mobility seemed to enhance the lack of Google’s interest in backing other hardware manufacturers.  My first question is what is the difference between generic drugs and name brand drugs, and this situation, and how do Generics persist in the marketplace?  Is this battle really Android versus Apple, but Google is keeping an arm’s length because they have their own hardware manufacturer internally?  Second, are every single innovation adopted by one OS and/or hardware manufacturer, e.g. mutithreaded / multitasking support, all up for debate, fines, and closed the ability to compete in the marketplace.  This situation smells of geopolitics, and how American Capitalism marketplace may be leveraging some form of Protectionism.  Again, this case, and possibly Samsung should partner with another Android OS partner, possibly outside the U.S., to transform this case to the U.S. Supreme Court, and make this about the Operating Systems rather than hardware.