Social Networks - Are they really that dangerous?

Social Networks have been around for a while now, staring with Facebook and MySpace and moving into the Twitter era and now you can find a persons life quite clearly on the Internet. Ever since they were created though, people have criticised social media for not doing enough about privacy.

Recently, these social networks have come under increased scrutiny regarding the posting of blatantly illegal material on the walls of tribute groups on Facebook. I believe that some of these criticisms are uncalled for.
Why? Simply because it is not up to Facebook to decide what privacy settings to put on groups, it is up to the person who created the group. If the person who creates a group chooses not to change the privacy settings to make it more closed then that is their choice. The options menu is there and easily accessible but people choose to get the group made quickly and not well.

Then there is the identity fraud issue which is also completely wrong. All Social Networks have privacy settings which you can change. On Facebook you can set it so you have to be a friend to access any information, photos or wall on your profile. Only recently has this come up yet it has been there for years. Just because people choose not to notice or use it doesn't mean that Social Networks are places where identity fraud is rife.

Overall, Social Networks are one of the safest and most privacy conscious places on the web. People who say that this is wrong either are very ignorant or simply want social networks to move in the wrong direction and make everyone private and make social networks very, very anti-social. These sites are already doing a good job and the media and the general public should calm down and stop trying to find problems with something that is already fine. If you want to make yourself less public then change you Privacy Settings, you don't have to abandon the social revolution because you believe that you can't do anything about your own security.

P.S On Facebook the privacy settings are under the account menu in the top right corner of the page...use it!

Apple's innovation machine fails with the iPad

Last week Apple announced their much awaited product... the iPad. The product idea is good but it is just a bloated, oversized iPod Touch. The lack of innovation is surprising from Apple, who are renowned for their constant new ideas, almost as if they have a machine that just churns out innovation.

When Apple released the first GUI machine in the 80s it was an innovation, the same with the iPod and iPhone but the iPad just isn't anything new. The OS is just the iPhone OS, there are no notable features, there isn't a camera, there isn't anything to tell it apart from previous Apple products.

If Apple had played their cards right they could have innovated this product to become a proper ebook reader but the 10hr battery life just doesn't compare to the 20-30hrs offered on ebook reading devices like the Kindle and Nook.
By blowing up the iPod Touch and creating a tablet, what Apple have done is create a product that fits in an useless space between an iPod and an ebook reader.

Looking at Apple's past when it comes to tablet PCs doesn't help either. The Apple Newton for instance was a huge failure and it is looking like the iPad may have a similar reputation. If Apple had created a unique device that could run a scaled down OSX and run programs like Photoshop, the iPad might have looked like a success. If Apple had created a standalone ebook reader then there most certainly would have been success, but the way Apple has designed the iPad just makes it a device that no one will need.

Nonetheless, it is an Apple product so people will buy it just because of the badge and not because it will help them or be useful to them in any way.

Apple's January 27th event...what will be announced?

In about a week Apple is going to hold a mysterious event where they will announce their "latest creation". Rumours speculate that it will be a tablet PC but I'm not so sure. What is Apple's incentive for making a tablet? Based on rumours it will run iPhone OS but that leaves it open to apps on a 10" screen...app makers would have to rebuild existing apps to run on the tablet in full screen. This would be a risky move as there would have to be a separate app store and Apple has no reason to do this.

Apple also recently started talking to publishers and newspapers about content deals. This makes me think that it won't be a tablet that Apple will be announcing but instead a 10" touch screen ebook reader to rival the Amazon Kindle (and Kindle DX) as well as the Barnes and Noble Nook. Such a device would most likely be a colour ebook reader (making use of to the OLED screen) unlike the other devices and would be a game changer like the iPhone and iPod.

Another possibility for what will be announced would be an Apple Netbook with touch screen capabilities. This however seems less likely because neetbooks a declining in popularity.

Nothing will be known until the 27th but the rumour mill will keep on churning until then and whatever is announced it is sure to be popular, not just because it is an Apple product but also because it will innovate technology in a way Apple has been doing for years.

The NBN: Lower Prices vs Higher Speeds

Today's Australian reports that the general public would prefer a compromise between the price they pay for the increased speed in FTTH connections and the speed. It says that "for most people, the prices for access to the fibre network would have to be comparable to what already exists in the marketplace today -- at speeds that would only be modestly higher".

This is completely stupid, most people would love to have 100Mb/s speeds and, as the actual infrastructure is being payed for by taxes, there won't be a huge increase in prices.  The article also says that there will be a push to "encourage people to make the switch to fibre and then only slowly increase speeds and prices as consumer demand grew over time". The demand when this network goes live around 2020 will be huge initially and therefore if they are to increase speeds and prices as demand grows they we will probably end up with at least 80Mb/s from day one and prices around $89.99/month. Where could any incrase go after that? Nowhere.
Anyone with a brain can clearly see that when this network is rolled out, prices will not increase drammatically, as hinted in the article, because the infrastructure has been paid for so there will only be access fees which will only be marginally higher than prices today. Most peole would be happy to pay $20-$30 more than now to get an 80% or more speed increase.

The whole NBN plan is in a shambles and people who follow tech, like me, are gettign sick of the talk and just wanting teh network to be built and running on schedule, givign Australians faster internet speeds comparable to those overseas.

Introducing ...Tagged Politics

Want to get your Political opinion fix...then head on down to the newest member of the Tagged family Tagged Politics. Over time Tagged Politics will become full of political opinion and wisdom for you to ponder over whenever you like. Hope you enjoy!

No Youtube Live in 2009...but maybe 2010

This week I emailed Youtube to ask if there was going to be a Youtube Live in 2009...their answer was no. This is probably appropriate considering it is already October and they would have made they announcement at least 2 months ago. However, they haven't ruled out a Youtube Live 2010, saying "We haven't taken that possibility off the table". Youtube Live in 2008 was a very expensive endeavour and with the Global Financial Crisis this year, and Google's declining stock price, Youtube Live was probably not a priority. If there is to be a Youtube Live in 2010, we will hear about it next year.

Steam - Is it really a conflict of interest?

 There has been a lot of talk lately in the gaming realm about whether Vale's Steam distribution service is a blatant conflict of interest. The argument for this is that they make games and they have a platform to sell them and can therefore rip off 3rd party developers (including EA and Activision) and exploit them, while still maintaining a positive revenue stream.

This is preposterous as  games sold on Steam, including those made by Valve, are clearly cheaper than if bought at a bricks and mortar store. If Valve were trying to rip off 3rd parties then they would charge less for their games. Also if these other developers were being ripped off and exploited then they would have pulled out of Steam, leaving it to die.

The only way that these developers could be exploited is through binding contracts with Valve, to distribute on Steam, giving Valve a larger than normal slice of the profit made on the game.

Steam is one of the most successful online distribution systems and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon. If these developers and publishers think they are being ripped off then they should just pull out of Steam. Take Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford, his game Borderlands, which Tagged previewed a month ago, is being sold on Steam and yet he is making comments against Steam...SHUT UP AND ACCEPT STEAM FOR WHAT IT IS. If he doesn't like it then maybe he should not distribute his game using it.