The search engine giant has shelled out $3.2 billion
to buy Nest Labs, the maker of super-sleek
appliances including a thermostat that looks like it’s
out of a sci-fi movie. It’s Google’s big push to get
into the lucrative and growing market of connected
homes.
Nest is best known for its “Learning Thermostat,”
which figures out users’ daily habits. The
technology is already savvy enough, for example, to
know not to blast cool air through the house on a
hot summer’s day if everyone has already left for
work.
Advertise
In short, Nest understands what users are doing
every day in a way that Google’s own search
engines and tablets don’t reach. It’s a truly home-
centered device that gives Google a view into how
people live in the physical world, and not just how
they live online.
“The two companies may seem different, but at
their core, they’re both heavily focused on
understanding the behavior of individuals,” said
Anind Dey, associate professor at Carnegie Mellon's
Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
“People have tablets and phones, but we don’t
think of them as home appliances,” Dey added.
“[Nest] is something that’s in your house, on
your wall, and it knows when you come and
go.”
Those types of built-in and outwardly
innocuous devices make up the dream of the
so-called “connected home,” where extremely
sophisticated tech is as everyday as the family
goldfish.
For years and years, technology trade shows
have crowed that they were close to
developing devices that would all connect to
one another. In this connected “Internet of
Things,” a homeowner could unlock their front
door, check her tire pressure, and make sure
the dishwasher is off, all while sitting in front of her
desktop at work.
So far that has been a pipe dream, but the
technology – hardware, operating systems and
connectivity – could finally be coming together.
Loads of companies including Microsoft, Sony, Intel
and AT&T are working to make the connected
home a reality, and while no company has quite
figured it out yet, they have huge financial incentive
to do so: Cisco predicts the “Internet of Things”
economy will reach $14.4 trillion spread over the
next decade.
Nest gives Google a foot in the door of that
potentially lucrative space. Google has made clear
that it wants to be on the forefront of innovation, and
after getting itself on peoples’ faces with Google
Glass and behind the wheel of a driverless car,
conquering the domestic sphere seems to be the
logical next step.
“The first 15 years of Google and the first 20-odd
years of the web have been focused on human
beings,” said Sanjay Sarma, an associate professor
of mechanical engineering at MIT. “The next era is
going to be inanimate things. Google knows that.”
For companies like Google, the appeal of these
inanimate, Internet-connected “things” is the data
they transmit. Nest’s data could provide Google
with deep insights into its customers’ daily habits—
particularly when combined with all that Google
already knows about those users from their web
searches to emails to phone use.
Advertise
Such a combination is mouthwatering for
companies like Google – but not everyone is likely
to see a Google-connected device as just another
piece of furniture. Nest issued a statement on
Monday assuring customers that its privacy policy
“clearly limits the use of customer information to
providing and improving Nest’s products and
services. We’ve always taken privacy seriously
and this will not change.”
However, Nest’s statement doesn’t exclude
possibilities like Google using anonymized data that
can’t be tied back to any specific user – which
could still be extremely valuable. Both Nest and
Google declined to comment beyond the statements
the companies issued on Monday.
No matter how Google harnesses Nest and its data
in the future, Sarma, the MIT professor, thinks this
is the acquisition that will push home automation
further into mainstream reality.
“A large, credible company like Google entering the
fray really accelerates how quickly [home
automation] will move,” Sarma said. “It’s a lightning
rod.”
Dey disagreed.
“For the last 20 years we’ve always said we’re 10
years away from the full, mainstream Internet of
Things. I still feel that way today,” Dey said. “I still
think this is a very limited step.”
Instead, Dey said, the key is partnerships between
companies that each provide a part of the system.
While niche products like Nest’s thermostat may
take off, a major shift won’t happen until big
appliance companies ink deals with firms that are
able to support the underpinnings of a system of
connected devices.
“We’re talking about hardware, software, the cloud,
connectivity,” Dey said. “It’s a complex things, and
we’re making progress over the years. But like lots
of huge innovations, it’s the partnerships that make
it work.”
Share on Facebook Discuss 133
Five years ago, the
tweet that changed
everything
5 minutes ago
When U.S. Airways Flight 1549 touched down on the
frigid waters in the Hudson River on Jan. 15, 2009,
Twitter, for many, was just a funny word in the
dictionary. Fast forward five years and it's as
ubiquitous as a bird in the sky.
What was deemed "the most successful ditching in
aviation history" helped Twitter become the social
media powerhouse it is today, and the now-public
company has Janis Krums to thank.
"There's a plane in the Hudson. I'm on the ferry
going to pick up the people. Crazy." Krums tweeted
along with a photo to his 170 followers. Exactly 32
minutes later, the man who first reported "The
Miracle on the Hudson" was interviewed live on
MSNBC.
https://twitter.com/jkrums/
status/423373776114298880
"It changed everything," Twitter co-founder Jack
Dorsey told CNBC in 2013. "Suddenly the world
turned its attention because we were the source of
news—and it wasn't us, it was this person in the
boat using the service, which is even more
amazing."
Tweets now move billions of dollars in the stock
market, have delivered play-by-play of the killing of
the FBI's most wanted terrorist, and allow planet
Earth to communicate directly with humans and
machines residing in outer space.
© 2013 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Yes, Tumblr, Twitter
and Facebook are
copying each other.
But that could be a
good thing
1 hour ago
The more social media sites change, the more they
look the same.
Take Tumblr. The popular blogging platform just
introduced the ability to mention other users with
the "@" symbol.
If that sounds familiar, it's because Twitter offered
the feature when it launched in 2006. You can do
the same thing on Instagram, which, by the way, is
owned by Facebook. And yes, typing "@" into your
Facebook status will allow you to mention your
friends.
"People are used to using mentions on Twitter and
Facebook," Jan Rezab, CEO and co-founder of
social media analytics firm Socialbakers, told NBC
News. "It only makes sense that Tumblr launches
the exact same thing."
Advertise
As a recent Pew Research Center poll showed,
plenty of Twitter users also sign into Facebook and
Instagram. Once people get used to a popular
feature on one social network, Rezab said, they
want to be able to use it across all of them.
This isn't limited to mentions. Hashtags and
sponsored posts also spread from network to
network.
Nothing brings competing social media networks
together, however, like a rising star. Snapchat
bucked the sharing trend in 2011 by focusing on
letting users send private photos back and forth.
While Snapchat won't divulge how many users it
has, apparently it was impressive enough to
warrant a $3 billion offer from Facebook. (Snapchat
refused).
Once the young company started nipping at their
heels, both Twitter and Instagram responded by
offering their users features that seemed firmly
Snapchat-esque.
In December, Twitter introduced the ability to send
private photos via direct message , or "DM," a move
that came too little, too late for Anthony Weiner.
That same month, Instagram unveiled " Instagram
Direct," which also lets users send personal
snapshots and messages to each other.
A similar pheonomena happened when Foursquare
became the next hot thing at South by Southwest in
2009, except that instead of making
communications more private, companies lined up
to broadcast your location.
Foursquare is an app that lets users "check in" at
different locations, a function that was soon
emulated by Facebook and Twitter. Both companies
have since tweaked their initial geo-location
products, but the ability to share where you took a
Facebook photo or sent a tweet remains intact. Both
Instagram and Google+ offer similar features.
In the end, the winner is probably the user, Rezab
said. He compared the game of copycat to what
happened between early mobile operating systems,
resulting in the polished products we see today.
"Any kind of competition or feature upgrade is great
for consumers," Rezab said. "A lot of these things
are relatively easy to implement, and people just
want them. If companies don't please the user, they
could end up like some of the social networks we
don't talk about anymore, like Friendster or
Myspace."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered the tech beat for
TIME's Techland and wrote about politics as a staff
writer at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on
Twitter at @kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Drone school is ready
for takeoff
15 hours ago
Advertise
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Offensive liposuction
game sucked from
app stores
16 hours ago
A mobile game has been pulled from both Apple and
Google's selection of apps after indignation spread
online over its insensitive nature. Its graphic and,
many felt, sexist depiction of liposuction and plastic
surgery lit up Twitter with requests for the app's
removal.
"Plastic Surgery & Plastic Doctor & Plastic Hospital
Office for Barbie Version," as the app is confusingly
called, offered the following description:
Buzzfeed captured a selection of screenshots from
the game, which puts a blonde, smiling woman
through graphic surgery as the player cuts,
liposuctions, stitches and bandages her. Afterward,
clothes and accessories are made available to
dress up the newly slim patient.
Advertise
It's not actually Barbie, of course, though the
woman's name is "Barbara." It seems likely that
Mattel would have asked the app to be removed if
Everyday Sexism , which first pointed it out, had not
done so. "Plastic Surgery" was removed from both
stores a few hours later.
The Daily Dot reports that a second game with a
liposuction aspect was also removed. There are still
surgery apps available on both the Apple and
Google app marketplaces, though most appear to be
truly instructional, related to actual surgery clinics,
or otherwise less immediately troubling than this
one.
Thousands of apps get submitted and inspected by
Apple and Google, but it's still surprising when
something like this makes it through the process. A
Google representative offered no specific comment,
instead explaining that "generally we remove
applications that violate our policies." Apple has not
yet responded to inquiries.
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 3
Yeezus balks: Kanye
West sues over
'Coinye' bitcoins
16 hours ago
Yeah, he’s sayin’ they’re gold diggers. Kanye West
is suing the creators of “Coinye West,” a bitcoin
alternative, for using his name and image.
West’s lawyers filed the trademark-infringement
lawsuit against Coinye on Tuesday in federal court
in Manhattan. The identities of Coinye’s creators
are unknown, so the lawsuit names several entities
as defendants, including 100 John Does and
websites that allegedly let users exchange Coinye.
“Defendants have usurped Mr. West’s name
and likeness for the sole purpose of propping
up the perceived ‘value of the Defendant’s
digital coin mine,’” the lawsuit said. West’s
lawyers at Pryor Cashman did not immediately
respond to a request for further comment.
Coinye is one of many currencies spawned
after the meteoric rise of bitcoin, a so-called
“cryptocurrency” that is completely digital.
Coinye emerged at the tail end of 2013, when
the currency’s creators began posting about it
on Twitter and online forums.
On New Year’s Eve, the Coinye Twitter account
even tweeted at West himself:
@kanyewest Kanye, have you ever invested in
bitcoin or litecoin? What do you think of
@CoinyeWest ?
1:52 PM - 31 Dec 2013
Coinye
@CoinyeCoins
Follow
54 RETWEETS 17 FAVORITES
Then the creators granted an anonymous interview
to Vice on Jan. 2, in which one of them said: “We
hope he loves it, but if he doesn't, he really isn't
someone we want to piss off.”
Well…West was pissed off.
West's lawyers sent a cease-and-desist letter to
the Coinye creators (via email to
coinyewest@gmail.com ) on Jan. 6, according to The
Wall Street Journal .
But they neither ceased nor desisted. Instead the
Coinye creators simply added a fishtail to its logo of
West’s face, and launched their website and
currency a few days early.
Now West’s legal actions have clearly spooked the
Coinye creators, however.
Early Tuesday morning, a few hours before West
filed the lawsuit, the Coinye Twitter account
tweeted:
#BLAMEKANYE Coinye devs have dispersed.
New ownership, better things coming.
adf.ly/c5D8J
1:22 PM - 14 Jan 2014
Coinye
@CoinyeCoins
Follow
11 RETWEETS 5 FAVORITES
The Coinye site now reads: “Coinye is dead. You
win, Kanye.”
West isn’t the only celebrity taking action against
bitcoin alternatives. Norris Coin, a currency named
after Chuck Norris of “Walker, Texas Ranger” fame,
was meant to launch on Tuesday. Instead Norris
Coin dissolved after its namesake threatened legal
action, according to Ars Technica .
Apparently there’s nothing like the threat of a legal
roundhouse kick to shutter an unauthorized
celebrity bitcoin.
Share on Facebook Discuss 19
Experience feline
physics with this
'first-person cat
simulator'
19 hours ago
More than 40 years after a group of cartoon
felines first showed us all how " everybody
wants to be a cat " in the 1970 Disney classic
"The Aristocats," one enterprising video game
developer is trying to turn this collective
fantasy into a reality.
"Catlateral Damage," according to creator Chris
Chung, is a "first-person destructive cat
simulator." Unlike most first-person games,
players don't spend any time shooting at
zombies, space aliens or members of the Third
Reich. Which makes a lot of sense, because
most cats would probably much rather take a
nap than go through all the trouble of taking out
bad guys. Instead, "Catlateral Damage"
challenges its players to do what cats do best:
knock things over. In other words, the game
lets you be the star of your very own "Animals
Can Be Jerks" viral video. I doubt many players will
be as good as Teddy the A**hole Cat , though.
Advertise
"Catlateral's Damages" gameplay will be familiar to
players of any of the popular "Katamari Damacy"
console game. Both share a visually striking anime-
inspired aesthetic. Both are also basically just
games about piles of stuff — whether it be picking
up lots of random tchotchkes to roll them into a
gigantic ball ("Katamari") or swatting them onto the
floor for more points ("Catlateral"). More like CAT-
amari Damacy, amirite? OK, please don't knock me
off the table for that one ...
"Catlateral" is a joy to play, and it's currently free in
an alpha mode through the game's website. Chung
is working on a full game to release on Steam later
this year. Seeing as Valve unveiled its first round of
" Steam Machines" last week at the Consumer
Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas and the virtual
reality startup Oculus VR brought out a new and
improved version of its hotly anticipated headset
that just happens to be Steam compatible, I think
it's safe to say that the future of video games isn't
first-person shooters, but high-end cat simulators.
Watch the trailer for "Catlateral Damage" below:
- via Polygon
Yannick LeJacq is a contributing writer for NBC
News who has also covered technology and games
for Kill Screen, The Wall Street Journal and The
Atlantic. You can follow him on Twitter
at @YannickLeJacq and reach him by email at:
Yannick.LeJacq@nbcuni.com.
Share on Facebook Discuss 3
Screening job
candidates on
Facebook? Good luck
with that
19 hours ago
If the idea of a company checking you out on
Facebook before hiring you creeps you out,
you're not alone.
Researchers at North Carolina State University
recently found that companies that screen
social media accounts of job applicants alienate
those candidates and will have a harder time
attracting the best workers.
In some cases, social media screening puts the
company at greater risk of getting sued,
according to Will Stoughton, a Ph.D. student at
N.C. State and lead author of the research
paper.
In one exercise, two-thirds of online job
applicants who had been told that their
Facebook accounts had been reviewed for
"professionalism" said the practice was an invasion
of privacy that reflected poorly on the company
doing the screening.
In a second exercise, half the participants were
asked how they'd respond to social media screening
if it meant they got the job, while the other half were
told they didn't get the job. Getting hired didn't
change their opinion. In both groups, some 60
percent said they thought less of the company
because their privacy had been breached.
And 59 percent of those in the second exercise said
they were significantly more likely than a control
group that wasn't screened to take legal action
against the company for invasion of privacy.
"Elite job prospects have options, and are more
likely to steer clear of potential employers they
don't trust," said Lori Foster Thompson, a professor
of psychology at N.C. State and co-author of the
paper.
© 2013 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved
Share on Facebook Discuss 44
Verizon wins, Net
neutrality loses, as
court ruling opens
door to a tiered
Internet
21 hours ago
Telecom companies won a victory in the battle
over "Net neutrality" Tuesday after a U.S.
appeals court invalidated regulations from the
FCC that banned carriers from favoring traffic
from certain sources.
Those FCC rules were meant to force
broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic
equally — essentially making it impossible for
them to charge companies for a faster route
into people's homes.
Advertise
The FCC's "Open Internet Order" has long been
supported by President Barack Obama, who,
according to a 2010 White House statement, was
"strongly committed to Net neutrality in order to
keep an open Internet that fosters investment,
innovation, consumer choice, and free speech."
Now, the door is open for companies like AT&T,
Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile to create a tiered
Internet, where those who can pay the most can
utilize the fastest connections, while others are
stuck transmitting information at slower speeds. A
ban on completely blocking certain Internet traffic
sources was also overturned.
How did the court come to its decision? Ruling for
Verizon, it said that the FCC couldn't impose those
regulations because it failed to classify broadband
providers as "common carriers," which are private
companies that provide infrastructure services that
are easily monopolized — for example, telephone or
power companies.
The FCC, however, classified broadband providers
as "information services," like Google and other
Internet companies, which are subject to less
stringent regulations.
Thanks to that distinction, the court ruled that the
FCC had overstepped its authority with the Open
Internet Order, a decision that FCC Chairman Tom
Wheeler disagrees with.
In a statement released Tuesday, Wheeler said he
agreed instead with a previous ruling that the FCC
has "authority to enact measures encouraging the
deployment of broadband infrastructure" and that
the agency would "consider all available options,
including those for appeal, to ensure that these
networks on which the Internet depends continue to
provide a free and open platform for innovation and
expression, and operate in the interest of all
Americans.”
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered the tech beat for
TIME's Techland and wrote about politics as a staff
writer at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on
Twitter at @kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 91
Nobody wants to pay
for apps, says study
23 hours ago
Bad news for developers trying to build the next
Candy Crush. From now until 2018, only 0.01
percent of apps will be considered a financial
success, according to a study by research firm
Gartner.
That is despite a boom in smartphone
subscriptions, which are expected to hit 5.9
billion by 2019, according to predictions from
Ericsson .
If there are going to be so many smartphones,
why will there be so few profits? Because there
are a lot of freely quality apps out there, and
consumers are used to getting something for
nothing.
Advertise
In fact, 94.5 percent of apps downloaded in 2017 will
be free, according to Gartner. Companies release
free apps for a variety of reasons. Some are just
branding opportunities. (Yes, NBC News has an
app ).
Others rely on upgraded subscriptions, like
OKCupid, or in-game purchases for revenue —
sometimes to the consternation of parents who are
forced to pay for their children's "Smurfberry"
addiction . There are also plenty of apps that want to
follow the Instagram model and hook millions of
users with a cool concept before introducing
advertising.
Regardless of the reasons why, there are a lot of
amazing apps — like Ultravisual , Duolingo and
Venmo — that you can download now without
spending a cent.
Even if a company can create an app that people
might like, getting it to consumers is another
problem. As the Gartner study notes, people are
"increasingly turning to recommendation engines,
friends, social networking or advertising to discover
mobile applications rather than sorting through the
thousands of mobile apps available."
Unless you have a big social media presence and
plenty of ad dollars, it can be hard to break into the
mainstream.
"There are so many applications that are free and
that will never directly generate revenue," Ken
Dulaney, vice president at Gartner, wrote in the
study . "This is only going to get worse in the future
when there will be even greater competition,
especially in successful markets."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered the tech beat for
TIME's Techland and wrote about politics as a staff
writer at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on
Twitter at @kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 30
Do we need cyber
warfare treaties?
Study looks at legacy
of Stuxnet
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:54 PM ET
Over the last few years, Iran, China and the United
States have all deployed weapons capable of
damaging physical infrastructure, all without a
single explosion.
Unlike conventional weapons, these cyberweapons
aren't restricted by international treaties — partly
because governments know so little about their
neighbors' electronic arsenals.
Advertise
"With nuclear weapons, we at least had some idea
from satellites about how many weapons the Soviet
Union had and what they were capable of," Robert
Axelrod, a political scientist at the University of
Michigan, told NBC News. "Cyberweapons are
different. They can be stockpiled with other
countries knowing it, causing them to be more
frightened than they need to be, or not frightened
enough."
A new study from Axelrod and fellow University of
Michigan researcher Rumen Iliev tries to shed
some light on why governments choose to launch
cyberattacks, the timing behind them, and what kind
be done to prevent them from getting out of hand.
Iran reportedly launched a cyberattack against
Saudi Arabia oil firm Aramco in 2012. China has
been accused of doing the same against the U.S.
government computer systems.
But the most famous attack almost certainly
originated in the United States. In 2010, Stuxnet
made headlines.
It seemed like the perfect computer worm. For 17
months, it sped up the centrifuges at Iran's nuclear
enrichment center in Natanz while undetected,
damaging but not destroying them. Then, quietly, it
self-destructed.
In the end, Stuxnet temporarily disabled one-fifth of
the facility's centrifuges, setting back Iran's nuclear
program by two years, cyberdefense expert Ralph
Langner said in Foreign Policy. It was a big win for
for U.S. and Israeli intelligence — who, according to
documents leaked by former NSA contractor
Edward Snowden , developed the worm together.
"The capabilities that were employed in Stuxnet
were far beyond the capabilites of what individual
hackers could do," Axelrod said.
Escape into the wild
The problem? Stuxnet escaped from Iran, possibly
on somebody's laptop. Now it's out in the wild,
available to both foreign governments and individual
hackers who might want to attack anything from
water treatment plants to electrical grids to other
nuclear power plants.
If U.S. intelligence officials had used Axelrod and
Iliev's model, they probably would not have chosen
a different path, said Axelrod, mostly because the
people who created it had to move fast. Stuxnet
depended on exploiting at least three different
vulnerabilities in Iran's nuclear facilities, any of
which could have been fixed by the time the worm
was deployed.
That short time window, the high stakes involved
with delaying Iran's nuclear program and the ability
of Stuxnet to operate undetected for so long made it
seem like a good idea at the time. (Axelrod's study
breaks down these factors down into "persistence,"
"stealth" and "stakes" — basically, whether a
cyberattack needs to be used quickly before
becoming irrelevant, whether an attack will be
useless later if used immediately and whether the
stakes are high enough to risk the blowback from
an attack).
Stuxnet certainly met its objective — delaying Iran's
nuclear progress. But its "escape" was probably
unforeseen, said Axelrod, and is just one of the
many dangers of letting cyber conflicts go
unregulated.
The model he developed could help countries at
least begin a dialogue about what is acceptable and
what isn't, possibly leading to a ban on attacking
things like civilian or banking infrastructure, Axelrod
said.
Advertise
"I think it could lead countries to realize that that
they can't exactly judge another country's
capabilities on what they see on a day-to-day
basis," he said. "That makes any kind of established
norms or agreements on limiting the use of
cyberweapons more valuable."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered technology for TIME's
Techland and wrote about politics as a staff writer
at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on Twitter at
@kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 11
Google acquires Nest
Labs for $3.2B
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:33 PM ET
Google has acquired Nest Labs, the company
founded by iPod creator Tony Fadell, for $3.2 billion.
The smart home startup makes a digital thermostat
as well as smoke detector.
Share on Facebook
Snapchat: Sorry about
the spam (but it's not
hack-related)
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:19 PM ET
Hot on the heels of a huge leak of user data, image-
sharing app Snapchat is reportedly experiencing
above-average levels of spam. The company said it
was sorry in a short blog post Monday.
"We want to apologize for any unwanted Snaps and
let you know our team is working on resolving the
issue," read the post. "As far as we know, this is
unrelated to the Find Friends issue we experienced
over the holidays."
Advertise
The "issue" was a security flaw that allowed
hackers to scrape around 4.6 million user names
and phone numbers from the service's databases.
The company had had ample warning and claimed
just before the breach that it had taken
countermeasures.
A recent update to the app should help lock things
down, but the spam will likely continue as "the
consequence of a quickly growing service," as the
blog post put it — unless, of course, users select the
option to only receive pictures and videos from
friends.
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 1
The 'smart life': How
connected cars,
clothes and homes
could fry your brain
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:03 PM ET
Welcome to the "smart life." Brain cells, beware.
It's an entirely wired existence where your Pebble
smart watch is connected to your smartphone,
which communicates with Google Glass, which can
send commands to your Internet-enabled
refrigerator and robotic vacuum — all from the
comfort of your iOS-equipped car. Sound like a bit
much?
Sure, that vision of the future might seem like an
amalgam of over-hyped tech trends. But it's
probably coming sooner than most people think.
Take "smart homes," connected houses filled with
light bulbs, security systems, appliances and TVs
that talk to each other and their owner, either
through a smartphone or directly through voice and
gesture commands. They aren't a "Jetsons"
fantasy; in fact, they could be relatively common in
five years, said Dr. Sanjay Sarma, director of digital
learning at MIT.
Advertise
And while " wearables" — including wearable
gadgets like Google Glass, smart watches, fitness
trackers and even sensor-equipped socks — aren't
the norm right now, Juniper Research predicts that
the size of the market will explode from $1.4 billion
in 2013 to $19 billion in 2018.
The car of the future will also probably be
connected. Google announced partnerships with
Audi, GM, Honda and Hyundai to bring Android
information and entertainment systems to
dashboards starting this year. Apple announced a
similar deal with BMW and Mercedes-Benz in June.
By 2020, 60 to 70 percent of cars sold in the United
States could be equipped with Android, iOS or some
other operating system, said Dr. Egil Juliussen, a
principal analyst at research firm IHS.
This is on top of the smartphones that are already
out there. Smartphone subscriptions are expected
to jump from 1.3 billion last year to 5.9 billion in
2019, according to a study from Ericsson .
It all seems like a techie's dream, but the "smart
life" could have unintended consequences.
"The problem is that your brain didn't evolve to
process all of that information at the same time,"
Earl Miller, professor of neuroscience at MIT, told
NBC News. "We evolved in an environment where
every new sight or noise was important — it could
mean a predator was about to leap out of the
bushes and eat you."
An email alert on a person’s smart watch isn't life
or death. But the human brain can't help but pay
attention to it, which could be a problem when five
other devices are vying for its attention.
Even when people think they're multitasking, what
they are really doing is switching between tasks,
not doing them simultaneously. And constant
exposure to multiple devices at the same time isn't
making people any better at it.
"The more stuff you have, the less you are able to
focus on individual things," Miller said. "There is
very limited bandwidth for conscious thought."
That assertion has been backed by several studies,
including one from Stanford researchers that found
that heavy multitaskers were worse at filtering out
distractions and focusing on a single task.
Not to condemn the "smart life" as entirely bad
thing. Organizing the household, communicating
with friends and family, and accessing information
— whether it's maps or obscure facts or whether or
not there is any beer in the fridge — will be easier
than ever before.
"Personally, I'm a technophile," said Edward Vogel,
a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the
University of Oregon. "There are a lot of positives to
this technology. Google Glass and other devices
have the potential to augment our world and help us
quickly make more informed decisions."
Advertise
The problem, Vogel said, was that tasks that require
more contemplation and sustained focus could
become more difficult.
That’s particularly bad news at high speeds.
The dangers of texting and operating a vehicle are
obvious. In 2008, texting was the most likely cause
of a train accident that killed 25 people in Southern
California.
But studies and multiple experts have claimed that
even hands-free communication distracts drivers
from the road. That is because people overestimate
their ability to multi-task, Miller said, causing them
to believe that that the highway is clear only to
crash into another car while giving voice commands
to their smart glasses.
In the end, however, the only solution to technology
overload, especially when driving, might be even
more technology.
"People love technology and having this constant
connectedness to the rest of the world. We are
never going to put that genie back in the bottle,"
Vogel said. "The only way we are going to be safe
when it comes to transportation is once Google
perfects the self-driving car."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered technology for TIME's
Techland and wrote about politics as a staff writer
at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on Twitter at
@kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 65
Mobile app use
doubles, social apps
triple in 2013: Report
Jan. 13, 2014 at 2:41 PM ET
The mobile world is growing at breakneck pace,
according to the latest data from app analytics
company Flurry: usage of apps on average doubled
over the last year, and some categories posted
even greater gains.
It's important to note that this data is not per user,
but total — in other words, much of the growth
comes from more people getting smartphones, not
just from people opening apps more.
Advertise
Even so, the rate of increase is remarkable,
especially that of the "messaging and social"
category of apps, which grew in use by 203 percent
during 2013. This includes the obvious players, like
Twitter and Facebook, but also new and promising
chat apps and platforms like WhatsApp and China's
WeChat.
Such apps are both replacing SMS and providing
new and interesting ways for mobile users to
interact, from trading silly videos in Snapchat to
doing group audio without using up valuable
minutes.
"Utilities and productivity" also saw a major uptick
as more phones continue to grow as tools for work:
secure email, shared documents, remote access,
and other office-friendly tasks are being used more
than ever.
Flurry's data set was enormous: the company
tracked 4.7 billion app "sessions" (i.e. opening email
to read or send something) in one day, and over the
year had amassed 1.126 trillion to mine for data. As
the company says on its blog, "if the first few days
of January are any indication, the mobile world is
looking at another major growth year."
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Push is on to get ‘kill
switch’ into
smartphones
Jan. 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM ET
Everyone wants a smartphone, especially muggers.
Smartphone thefts now account for 30 percent to 40
percent of all robberies nationwide, according to the
Secure Our Smartphones (S.O.S.) Initiative , a
coalition of police, prosecutors, lawmakers and
consumer advocates. The group claims about 1.6
million people were attacked for their phones in
2012.
Law enforcement believes technology exists – the
so-called “kill switch” – to stop this epidemic of
crime by removing the economic incentive for
stealing these expensive phones.
If activated, the kill switch would permanently lock
the phone, making it inoperable on any network
anywhere in the world.
Phone manufacturers and wireless carriers at odds
Apple now has the “ Activation Lock ” feature on its
new iOS 7 operating system. And Samsung has
developed kill switch technology for Android
phones. But so far, the option has not been
deployed and critics blame the nation’s wireless
carriers for blocking it.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, co-
chair of the S.O.S. Initiative, called it “disturbing”
that the nation’s leading smartphone carriers
knowingly dismissed technology that could save
lives. He’s suggested they might not want a kill
switch because they receive so much money from
companies that sell phone insurance.
“My office will determine whether these companies
allowed their business relationships to influence
their ability to take immediate action against theft,”
Schneiderman said in a news release .
Last June, S.O.S. called on wireless carriers and
phone manufacturers to “put public safety before
corporate profits” by implementing this kill switch
technology on all new phones within a year.
Mark Leno , a California state senator from San
Francisco, refuses to wait any longer. The Democrat
plans to introduce a bill in the next few weeks that
would require a kill switch in all new smartphones
sold in California.
“It is time to act on this serious public safety threat
to our communities,” Leno said. “Criminals know
there is a very valuable device on most people
walking down the street. To address these crimes,
we have to take some bold action and that’s what
this bill would do.”
Leno wants the kill switch to be something that’s
already part of every new phone, not something you
have to download, even if it’s free. For this to be a
deterrent, he said, criminals must know every new
phone has a kill switch.
San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon, a
founding member of the S.O.S. Initiative, supports
the Leno bill because he believes this could prompt
the industry to come up with a solution before it is
forced to do something.
"If the industry doesn't move ahead, the
manufacturers and carriers who are refusing to
work on this technological solution, then we will
have a legislative process they will have to deal
with," Gascon said.
What have the wireless carriers done?
CTIA speaks for the wireless industry. Michal
Altschul, CTIA’s senior vice president and general
counsel, said its member companies have moved
“as quickly as possible” to solve the theft problem.
In a statement to NBC News, Altschul said they are
working to develop a “proactive, multifaceted
approach of databases, technology, consumer
education and legislation and international
partnerships to remove the aftermarket for stolen
phones.”
For example, there are now databases that blacklist
stolen smartphones so they cannot be reactivated
again in the U.S. CTIA also supports a bill in
Congress from Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) that
would impose tough penalties on those who steal or
illegally modify mobile devices.
Here’s what the big four wireless companies have
to say:
T-Mobile is exploring tools and technologies to end
the risk of device theft, including a kill switch option.
Sprint said “numerous concerns and technical
details” need to be reviewed before a kill switch
could be preloaded onto devices. One of those
concerns is that a kill switch could be “exploited by
hackers or terrorists.”
AT&T did not respond directly, referring us to the
industry association.
Verizon seems to be the most amenable to this
technology. The company told us it “supports” a
free kill switch application for Android devices.
“Once a manufacturer provides us an Android ‘kill
switch’ that is free to consumers we will work to
provide it to our customers,” wrote Verizon
spokesman Scott Charleston.
Tyler Shields, an expert on mobile security at
Forrester Research, said phone carriers are
attempting to balance security against customer
convenience.
“The wireless carriers are trying to defend their
ability to have the ultimate best customer
experience without having to generally put in too
much security,” Shields said.
After all, we buy these cool phones for the bells and
whistles, not security.
Where do we go from here?
Things seem to be progressing, even if that’s a bit
slower than some would like. But there are many
important issues that still need to be decided:
Can the solution be software-based?
Tom Kemp, CEO of Centrify, a software and cloud
security provider, believes most software-based kill
switches have limitations because criminals can
find a way around them.
“If you really want the full solution, it needs to be
some sort of hardware chip that completely bricks
the phone and some genius needs to figure out the
right way to do that,” Kemp said.
Should the kill switch permanently destroy the
phone?
Someone who loses a phone and uses the kill
switch would need to buy a new one. On the other
hand, if that phone is not permanently bricked, it
could be shipped overseas and activated there –
making the crime profitable.
Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him
on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan
website.
Share on Facebook Discuss 160
Up close and very
personal: 4K porn is
becoming a reality
Jan. 13, 2014 at 10:56 AM ET
Get ready for 4K porn. In the wake of Netflix
and YouTube announcing that they would start
streaming in ultra-high definition, porn
production company Naughty America unveiled
its plan to offer adult entertainment at four
times the resolution of regular 1080p HD.
Right now, few consumers have displays
capable of streaming 4K , but that could change
in 2014. At the Consumer Electronics Show
(CES) in Las Vegas, both Vizio and Polaroid
showed off 4K TVs that cost under $1,000. Dell
announced a new 4K display monitor priced at
only $699.
Advertise
Before the technology becomes widespread, it
makes sense for smaller companies to wait before
investing in expensive 4K camera equipment and
the massive server space needed to host extra-
large files. Naughty America plans to cover its costs
by charging an extra $10 on top of the $24.95 it
charges for an HD monthly subscription, according
to the Wall Street Journal . Another adult film
company, Huccio, also announced 4K streaming in
October.
While it might seem like a niche industry, online
pornography accounts for 8.3 percent of all web
traffic in the United States, meaning there are plenty
of potential customers who might pony up extra
cash to watch ultra-high definition NSFW content.
Despite all of the new 4K displays on the market,
consumers still need a computer capable of
streaming uncomfortably detailed video at home.
Those don't come cheap. Even top-of-the-line
computers rarely have the memory and graphics
cards capable of smoothly running 4K video. One
exception: The new Mac Pro , which starts at $3,000
and can support up to three 4K displays.
Are there people out there willing to spend that
much money on porn? Considering that it's a $14
billion industry , there is a good chance that the
answer is yes.
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered technology for TIME's
Techland and wrote about politics as a staff writer
at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on Twitter at
@kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 1
Reuters sources:
Other US retailers
victims of
cyberattacks
Jan. 12, 2014 at 7:39 AM ET
BOSTON/WASHINGTON -- Target Corp and Neiman
Marcus are not the only U.S. retailers whose
networks were breached over the holiday shopping
season late last year, according to sources familiar
with attacks on other merchants that have yet to be
publicly disclosed.
Smaller breaches on at least three other well-
known U.S. retailers took place and were
conducted using similar techniques as the one on
Target, according to the people familiar with the
attacks. Those breaches have yet to come to light.
Also, similar breaches may have occurred earlier
last year.
The sources said that they involved retailers with
outlets in malls, but declined to elaborate. They also
said that while they suspect the perpetrators may
be the same as those who launched the Target
attack, they cannot be sure because they are still
trying to find the culprits behind all of the attacks.
Law enforcement sources have said they suspect
the ring leaders are from Eastern Europe, which is
where most big cyber crime cases have been
hatched over the past decade.
Only one well-known retailer, Neiman Marcus, has
said that they too have been victim of a cyber attack
since Target's December 19 disclosure that some
40 million payment card numbers had been stolen in
a cyber attack. On Friday, Target said an
investigation found that hackers stole the personal
information of at least 70 million customers,
including names, mailing addresses, telephone
numbers and email addresses.
Neiman Marcus said it was not sure if the breach
was related to the Target incident.
Most states have laws that require companies to
contact customers when certain types of personal
information is compromised. In many cases the
task of notification falls on the credit card issuer.
Merchants are required to report breaches when
certain types of personal information, including
social security numbers are compromised. It was
not immediately clear if that was the case with the
retailers who were attacked around the same time
as Target.
The Secret Service and Department of Justice,
which are investigating the Target breach, declined
comment.
Related:
Neiman Marcus hack affected customers' credit
cards
'Worst breach in history' puts data-security
pressure on retail industry
Cost of data breach could give Target sticker shock
Copyright 2014 Thomson Reuters.
Share on Facebook Discuss 54
Wear, stare and
share: The gadgets of
CES
Jan. 10, 2014 at 7:44 PM ET
This year's Consumer Electronics Show was full of
interesting technology (and a few interesting
characters) — but the show is so big and busy that
it's hard to remember just what exactly that tech
was. Here are the bits of CES we found most
memorable.
Wearable technology - The most visible trend this
year was wearables , but not just the usual step-
tracking fitness bands. Existing wearables are
getting smarter, like Sony's SmartBand , which pulls
in pictures and updates from social networks to
integrate with your physical activity. And although
the smartwatches on display were largely
forgettable, the well-received Pebble got a nice-
looking, waterproof metal upgrade.
Advertise
The personal health aspect of wearables is getting
emphasized, as well. The June wristband keeps
track of your UV exposure, and Reebok's
Checklight monitors head movements during sports
to warn of possible concussions (scroll past the
weirder wearable tech in this article to read more).
4K TVs - If you asked anybody at Samsung, Sony,
LG, Sharp, Vizio or a dozen other companies, they
would tell you that the hottest new thing at CES is
ultra high-definition TVs. With four times the pixels
of 1080p, these 4K sets are indeed sharp as a tack
— though some experts say the difference is almost
imperceptible when you're watching from a normal
distance. You can probably see it with a 20-inch
tablet on your lap, though.
The other concern is that there isn't much in the
way of content for 4K TVs. After all, even Hollywood
features are often shot at far lower resolution than
that, and few channels or devices support it (and
most Americans still own a VCR). But Netflix is
getting behind 4K , at least with the shows that have
the budget to shoot in UHD, like "House of Cards."
High-tech toys - The older generation may yearn
for the days when kids were entertained by a stick
and a piece of string, but today's tots are getting a
bit more than that — for example, Bluetooth-
controlled paper airplanes . We also were charmed
by the Ozobot, which follows lines drawn on devices
or paper and responds to color-based commands.
And the Moss robotic building blocks promise
LEGO-like possibilities, creating remote-control
cars while learning the rudiments of programming.
Polaroid's C3 camera may not be a toy, strictly
speaking, but it sure looks like one — maybe it
could be baby's first camera.
Celebrity drama - What's a big show like CES
without a couple high-profile mishaps? Trash-
talking T-Mobile CEO John Legere, just before
announcing a plan to pay families to break their
contracts with AT&T and Verizon, was kicked
out of an AT&T party at the Palms. Why was he
at his competitor's soiree? "I just wanted to
hear Macklemore."
And who can forget director Michael Bay's
incredibly awkward, stammering walkout (right,
in GIF form) in the middle of Samsung's press
event? He later apologized and explained, but
at the time it was mystifying and more than a little
uncomfortable to watch.
Gaming's next steps - The Xbox One and
PlayStation 4 have just come out, but that doesn't
mean nothing else is happening in gaming. A new
prototype virtual reality headset from Oculus VR
made a splash despite not even having a booth —
believe us when we say it's immersive, and miles
beyond the already-impressive original.
The PlayStation Now super-simple streaming
service and Valve's Steam Machines make it easier
than ever to put games in your living room. The
shape of gaming is changing — and these
companies are at the forefront.
Everything else - There is a lot of stuff at CES, but
not everything falls under the few categories above.
E-cigarettes , for instance, are taking off in terms of
tech and sales. Your iPhone is now a thermal
camera. A smart home means that from your fridge
to your mattress , every item in your home might
soon have a chip in it. And then, of course, there
were the dozen or more 3-D printers and scanners
on display.
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 2
Smart Rifle never
misses, now comes in
semi-automatic form
Jan. 10, 2014 at 5:59 PM ET
In the near future, you won't even need to know
how to fire a rifle to be a crack shot.
At the Consumer Electronic Show, the Austin,
Texas-based start-up TrackingPoint showed off its
all-new 500 Series AR Smart Rifle, a gun that
makes it almost impossible for any user to miss.
(Read more : Now there's a gun that let's you shoot )
TrackingPoint is the inventor of Precision Guided
Firearms, a guided shooting system that the
company says creates the most accurate guns in
the world. The new rifle is the company's first
semi-automatic series.
Advertise
This technology turns even a neophyte into a
marksman, at least within a 500-yard range. The
user simply "tags" the target, and the gun and
ammo do the rest, all for a mere $9,950—the
starting price for the new series.
In fact, the system is so accurate that a user will
have up to five times the accuracy of an
experienced shooter, said Oren Schauble, the
company's marketing director.
(Read more : CES 2014: Big movers beyond the
headlines)
The gun can track a target moving at up to 10 mph
and allows for rapid engagement, meaning a person
can shoot multiple targets quickly.
But TrackingPoint doesn't want people to think of it
as just a fancy gun maker. The company is really
focused on the technology inside the gun, Schauble
said.
"Firearms have been the same for decades, the
same old design in guns and ammunition," he said.
"What defines our product from the rest of the
marketplace is our firearms integrate technology.
We always try to ask ourselves, what in the
technology space has not been applied to the arms
space and how can we do it?"
TrackingPoint, which rolled out its first Precision
Guided Firearm last year, doesn't just include the
technology for a perfect shot. It also integrates
other technological functions into it, such as video
capabilities and Wi-Fi connectivity. These features
allow users to record their hunting expeditions and
even share the footage on social media platforms,
like Facebook and YouTube.
to buy Nest Labs, the maker of super-sleek
appliances including a thermostat that looks like it’s
out of a sci-fi movie. It’s Google’s big push to get
into the lucrative and growing market of connected
homes.
Nest is best known for its “Learning Thermostat,”
which figures out users’ daily habits. The
technology is already savvy enough, for example, to
know not to blast cool air through the house on a
hot summer’s day if everyone has already left for
work.
Advertise
In short, Nest understands what users are doing
every day in a way that Google’s own search
engines and tablets don’t reach. It’s a truly home-
centered device that gives Google a view into how
people live in the physical world, and not just how
they live online.
“The two companies may seem different, but at
their core, they’re both heavily focused on
understanding the behavior of individuals,” said
Anind Dey, associate professor at Carnegie Mellon's
Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
“People have tablets and phones, but we don’t
think of them as home appliances,” Dey added.
“[Nest] is something that’s in your house, on
your wall, and it knows when you come and
go.”
Those types of built-in and outwardly
innocuous devices make up the dream of the
so-called “connected home,” where extremely
sophisticated tech is as everyday as the family
goldfish.
For years and years, technology trade shows
have crowed that they were close to
developing devices that would all connect to
one another. In this connected “Internet of
Things,” a homeowner could unlock their front
door, check her tire pressure, and make sure
the dishwasher is off, all while sitting in front of her
desktop at work.
So far that has been a pipe dream, but the
technology – hardware, operating systems and
connectivity – could finally be coming together.
Loads of companies including Microsoft, Sony, Intel
and AT&T are working to make the connected
home a reality, and while no company has quite
figured it out yet, they have huge financial incentive
to do so: Cisco predicts the “Internet of Things”
economy will reach $14.4 trillion spread over the
next decade.
Nest gives Google a foot in the door of that
potentially lucrative space. Google has made clear
that it wants to be on the forefront of innovation, and
after getting itself on peoples’ faces with Google
Glass and behind the wheel of a driverless car,
conquering the domestic sphere seems to be the
logical next step.
“The first 15 years of Google and the first 20-odd
years of the web have been focused on human
beings,” said Sanjay Sarma, an associate professor
of mechanical engineering at MIT. “The next era is
going to be inanimate things. Google knows that.”
For companies like Google, the appeal of these
inanimate, Internet-connected “things” is the data
they transmit. Nest’s data could provide Google
with deep insights into its customers’ daily habits—
particularly when combined with all that Google
already knows about those users from their web
searches to emails to phone use.
Advertise
Such a combination is mouthwatering for
companies like Google – but not everyone is likely
to see a Google-connected device as just another
piece of furniture. Nest issued a statement on
Monday assuring customers that its privacy policy
“clearly limits the use of customer information to
providing and improving Nest’s products and
services. We’ve always taken privacy seriously
and this will not change.”
However, Nest’s statement doesn’t exclude
possibilities like Google using anonymized data that
can’t be tied back to any specific user – which
could still be extremely valuable. Both Nest and
Google declined to comment beyond the statements
the companies issued on Monday.
No matter how Google harnesses Nest and its data
in the future, Sarma, the MIT professor, thinks this
is the acquisition that will push home automation
further into mainstream reality.
“A large, credible company like Google entering the
fray really accelerates how quickly [home
automation] will move,” Sarma said. “It’s a lightning
rod.”
Dey disagreed.
“For the last 20 years we’ve always said we’re 10
years away from the full, mainstream Internet of
Things. I still feel that way today,” Dey said. “I still
think this is a very limited step.”
Instead, Dey said, the key is partnerships between
companies that each provide a part of the system.
While niche products like Nest’s thermostat may
take off, a major shift won’t happen until big
appliance companies ink deals with firms that are
able to support the underpinnings of a system of
connected devices.
“We’re talking about hardware, software, the cloud,
connectivity,” Dey said. “It’s a complex things, and
we’re making progress over the years. But like lots
of huge innovations, it’s the partnerships that make
it work.”
Share on Facebook Discuss 133
Five years ago, the
tweet that changed
everything
5 minutes ago
When U.S. Airways Flight 1549 touched down on the
frigid waters in the Hudson River on Jan. 15, 2009,
Twitter, for many, was just a funny word in the
dictionary. Fast forward five years and it's as
ubiquitous as a bird in the sky.
What was deemed "the most successful ditching in
aviation history" helped Twitter become the social
media powerhouse it is today, and the now-public
company has Janis Krums to thank.
"There's a plane in the Hudson. I'm on the ferry
going to pick up the people. Crazy." Krums tweeted
along with a photo to his 170 followers. Exactly 32
minutes later, the man who first reported "The
Miracle on the Hudson" was interviewed live on
MSNBC.
https://twitter.com/jkrums/
status/423373776114298880
"It changed everything," Twitter co-founder Jack
Dorsey told CNBC in 2013. "Suddenly the world
turned its attention because we were the source of
news—and it wasn't us, it was this person in the
boat using the service, which is even more
amazing."
Tweets now move billions of dollars in the stock
market, have delivered play-by-play of the killing of
the FBI's most wanted terrorist, and allow planet
Earth to communicate directly with humans and
machines residing in outer space.
© 2013 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Yes, Tumblr, Twitter
and Facebook are
copying each other.
But that could be a
good thing
1 hour ago
The more social media sites change, the more they
look the same.
Take Tumblr. The popular blogging platform just
introduced the ability to mention other users with
the "@" symbol.
If that sounds familiar, it's because Twitter offered
the feature when it launched in 2006. You can do
the same thing on Instagram, which, by the way, is
owned by Facebook. And yes, typing "@" into your
Facebook status will allow you to mention your
friends.
"People are used to using mentions on Twitter and
Facebook," Jan Rezab, CEO and co-founder of
social media analytics firm Socialbakers, told NBC
News. "It only makes sense that Tumblr launches
the exact same thing."
Advertise
As a recent Pew Research Center poll showed,
plenty of Twitter users also sign into Facebook and
Instagram. Once people get used to a popular
feature on one social network, Rezab said, they
want to be able to use it across all of them.
This isn't limited to mentions. Hashtags and
sponsored posts also spread from network to
network.
Nothing brings competing social media networks
together, however, like a rising star. Snapchat
bucked the sharing trend in 2011 by focusing on
letting users send private photos back and forth.
While Snapchat won't divulge how many users it
has, apparently it was impressive enough to
warrant a $3 billion offer from Facebook. (Snapchat
refused).
Once the young company started nipping at their
heels, both Twitter and Instagram responded by
offering their users features that seemed firmly
Snapchat-esque.
In December, Twitter introduced the ability to send
private photos via direct message , or "DM," a move
that came too little, too late for Anthony Weiner.
That same month, Instagram unveiled " Instagram
Direct," which also lets users send personal
snapshots and messages to each other.
A similar pheonomena happened when Foursquare
became the next hot thing at South by Southwest in
2009, except that instead of making
communications more private, companies lined up
to broadcast your location.
Foursquare is an app that lets users "check in" at
different locations, a function that was soon
emulated by Facebook and Twitter. Both companies
have since tweaked their initial geo-location
products, but the ability to share where you took a
Facebook photo or sent a tweet remains intact. Both
Instagram and Google+ offer similar features.
In the end, the winner is probably the user, Rezab
said. He compared the game of copycat to what
happened between early mobile operating systems,
resulting in the polished products we see today.
"Any kind of competition or feature upgrade is great
for consumers," Rezab said. "A lot of these things
are relatively easy to implement, and people just
want them. If companies don't please the user, they
could end up like some of the social networks we
don't talk about anymore, like Friendster or
Myspace."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered the tech beat for
TIME's Techland and wrote about politics as a staff
writer at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on
Twitter at @kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Drone school is ready
for takeoff
15 hours ago
Advertise
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Offensive liposuction
game sucked from
app stores
16 hours ago
A mobile game has been pulled from both Apple and
Google's selection of apps after indignation spread
online over its insensitive nature. Its graphic and,
many felt, sexist depiction of liposuction and plastic
surgery lit up Twitter with requests for the app's
removal.
"Plastic Surgery & Plastic Doctor & Plastic Hospital
Office for Barbie Version," as the app is confusingly
called, offered the following description:
Buzzfeed captured a selection of screenshots from
the game, which puts a blonde, smiling woman
through graphic surgery as the player cuts,
liposuctions, stitches and bandages her. Afterward,
clothes and accessories are made available to
dress up the newly slim patient.
Advertise
It's not actually Barbie, of course, though the
woman's name is "Barbara." It seems likely that
Mattel would have asked the app to be removed if
Everyday Sexism , which first pointed it out, had not
done so. "Plastic Surgery" was removed from both
stores a few hours later.
The Daily Dot reports that a second game with a
liposuction aspect was also removed. There are still
surgery apps available on both the Apple and
Google app marketplaces, though most appear to be
truly instructional, related to actual surgery clinics,
or otherwise less immediately troubling than this
one.
Thousands of apps get submitted and inspected by
Apple and Google, but it's still surprising when
something like this makes it through the process. A
Google representative offered no specific comment,
instead explaining that "generally we remove
applications that violate our policies." Apple has not
yet responded to inquiries.
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 3
Yeezus balks: Kanye
West sues over
'Coinye' bitcoins
16 hours ago
Yeah, he’s sayin’ they’re gold diggers. Kanye West
is suing the creators of “Coinye West,” a bitcoin
alternative, for using his name and image.
West’s lawyers filed the trademark-infringement
lawsuit against Coinye on Tuesday in federal court
in Manhattan. The identities of Coinye’s creators
are unknown, so the lawsuit names several entities
as defendants, including 100 John Does and
websites that allegedly let users exchange Coinye.
“Defendants have usurped Mr. West’s name
and likeness for the sole purpose of propping
up the perceived ‘value of the Defendant’s
digital coin mine,’” the lawsuit said. West’s
lawyers at Pryor Cashman did not immediately
respond to a request for further comment.
Coinye is one of many currencies spawned
after the meteoric rise of bitcoin, a so-called
“cryptocurrency” that is completely digital.
Coinye emerged at the tail end of 2013, when
the currency’s creators began posting about it
on Twitter and online forums.
On New Year’s Eve, the Coinye Twitter account
even tweeted at West himself:
@kanyewest Kanye, have you ever invested in
bitcoin or litecoin? What do you think of
@CoinyeWest ?
1:52 PM - 31 Dec 2013
Coinye
@CoinyeCoins
Follow
54 RETWEETS 17 FAVORITES
Then the creators granted an anonymous interview
to Vice on Jan. 2, in which one of them said: “We
hope he loves it, but if he doesn't, he really isn't
someone we want to piss off.”
Well…West was pissed off.
West's lawyers sent a cease-and-desist letter to
the Coinye creators (via email to
coinyewest@gmail.com ) on Jan. 6, according to The
Wall Street Journal .
But they neither ceased nor desisted. Instead the
Coinye creators simply added a fishtail to its logo of
West’s face, and launched their website and
currency a few days early.
Now West’s legal actions have clearly spooked the
Coinye creators, however.
Early Tuesday morning, a few hours before West
filed the lawsuit, the Coinye Twitter account
tweeted:
#BLAMEKANYE Coinye devs have dispersed.
New ownership, better things coming.
adf.ly/c5D8J
1:22 PM - 14 Jan 2014
Coinye
@CoinyeCoins
Follow
11 RETWEETS 5 FAVORITES
The Coinye site now reads: “Coinye is dead. You
win, Kanye.”
West isn’t the only celebrity taking action against
bitcoin alternatives. Norris Coin, a currency named
after Chuck Norris of “Walker, Texas Ranger” fame,
was meant to launch on Tuesday. Instead Norris
Coin dissolved after its namesake threatened legal
action, according to Ars Technica .
Apparently there’s nothing like the threat of a legal
roundhouse kick to shutter an unauthorized
celebrity bitcoin.
Share on Facebook Discuss 19
Experience feline
physics with this
'first-person cat
simulator'
19 hours ago
More than 40 years after a group of cartoon
felines first showed us all how " everybody
wants to be a cat " in the 1970 Disney classic
"The Aristocats," one enterprising video game
developer is trying to turn this collective
fantasy into a reality.
"Catlateral Damage," according to creator Chris
Chung, is a "first-person destructive cat
simulator." Unlike most first-person games,
players don't spend any time shooting at
zombies, space aliens or members of the Third
Reich. Which makes a lot of sense, because
most cats would probably much rather take a
nap than go through all the trouble of taking out
bad guys. Instead, "Catlateral Damage"
challenges its players to do what cats do best:
knock things over. In other words, the game
lets you be the star of your very own "Animals
Can Be Jerks" viral video. I doubt many players will
be as good as Teddy the A**hole Cat , though.
Advertise
"Catlateral's Damages" gameplay will be familiar to
players of any of the popular "Katamari Damacy"
console game. Both share a visually striking anime-
inspired aesthetic. Both are also basically just
games about piles of stuff — whether it be picking
up lots of random tchotchkes to roll them into a
gigantic ball ("Katamari") or swatting them onto the
floor for more points ("Catlateral"). More like CAT-
amari Damacy, amirite? OK, please don't knock me
off the table for that one ...
"Catlateral" is a joy to play, and it's currently free in
an alpha mode through the game's website. Chung
is working on a full game to release on Steam later
this year. Seeing as Valve unveiled its first round of
" Steam Machines" last week at the Consumer
Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas and the virtual
reality startup Oculus VR brought out a new and
improved version of its hotly anticipated headset
that just happens to be Steam compatible, I think
it's safe to say that the future of video games isn't
first-person shooters, but high-end cat simulators.
Watch the trailer for "Catlateral Damage" below:
- via Polygon
Yannick LeJacq is a contributing writer for NBC
News who has also covered technology and games
for Kill Screen, The Wall Street Journal and The
Atlantic. You can follow him on Twitter
at @YannickLeJacq and reach him by email at:
Yannick.LeJacq@nbcuni.com.
Share on Facebook Discuss 3
Screening job
candidates on
Facebook? Good luck
with that
19 hours ago
If the idea of a company checking you out on
Facebook before hiring you creeps you out,
you're not alone.
Researchers at North Carolina State University
recently found that companies that screen
social media accounts of job applicants alienate
those candidates and will have a harder time
attracting the best workers.
In some cases, social media screening puts the
company at greater risk of getting sued,
according to Will Stoughton, a Ph.D. student at
N.C. State and lead author of the research
paper.
In one exercise, two-thirds of online job
applicants who had been told that their
Facebook accounts had been reviewed for
"professionalism" said the practice was an invasion
of privacy that reflected poorly on the company
doing the screening.
In a second exercise, half the participants were
asked how they'd respond to social media screening
if it meant they got the job, while the other half were
told they didn't get the job. Getting hired didn't
change their opinion. In both groups, some 60
percent said they thought less of the company
because their privacy had been breached.
And 59 percent of those in the second exercise said
they were significantly more likely than a control
group that wasn't screened to take legal action
against the company for invasion of privacy.
"Elite job prospects have options, and are more
likely to steer clear of potential employers they
don't trust," said Lori Foster Thompson, a professor
of psychology at N.C. State and co-author of the
paper.
© 2013 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved
Share on Facebook Discuss 44
Verizon wins, Net
neutrality loses, as
court ruling opens
door to a tiered
Internet
21 hours ago
Telecom companies won a victory in the battle
over "Net neutrality" Tuesday after a U.S.
appeals court invalidated regulations from the
FCC that banned carriers from favoring traffic
from certain sources.
Those FCC rules were meant to force
broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic
equally — essentially making it impossible for
them to charge companies for a faster route
into people's homes.
Advertise
The FCC's "Open Internet Order" has long been
supported by President Barack Obama, who,
according to a 2010 White House statement, was
"strongly committed to Net neutrality in order to
keep an open Internet that fosters investment,
innovation, consumer choice, and free speech."
Now, the door is open for companies like AT&T,
Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile to create a tiered
Internet, where those who can pay the most can
utilize the fastest connections, while others are
stuck transmitting information at slower speeds. A
ban on completely blocking certain Internet traffic
sources was also overturned.
How did the court come to its decision? Ruling for
Verizon, it said that the FCC couldn't impose those
regulations because it failed to classify broadband
providers as "common carriers," which are private
companies that provide infrastructure services that
are easily monopolized — for example, telephone or
power companies.
The FCC, however, classified broadband providers
as "information services," like Google and other
Internet companies, which are subject to less
stringent regulations.
Thanks to that distinction, the court ruled that the
FCC had overstepped its authority with the Open
Internet Order, a decision that FCC Chairman Tom
Wheeler disagrees with.
In a statement released Tuesday, Wheeler said he
agreed instead with a previous ruling that the FCC
has "authority to enact measures encouraging the
deployment of broadband infrastructure" and that
the agency would "consider all available options,
including those for appeal, to ensure that these
networks on which the Internet depends continue to
provide a free and open platform for innovation and
expression, and operate in the interest of all
Americans.”
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered the tech beat for
TIME's Techland and wrote about politics as a staff
writer at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on
Twitter at @kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 91
Nobody wants to pay
for apps, says study
23 hours ago
Bad news for developers trying to build the next
Candy Crush. From now until 2018, only 0.01
percent of apps will be considered a financial
success, according to a study by research firm
Gartner.
That is despite a boom in smartphone
subscriptions, which are expected to hit 5.9
billion by 2019, according to predictions from
Ericsson .
If there are going to be so many smartphones,
why will there be so few profits? Because there
are a lot of freely quality apps out there, and
consumers are used to getting something for
nothing.
Advertise
In fact, 94.5 percent of apps downloaded in 2017 will
be free, according to Gartner. Companies release
free apps for a variety of reasons. Some are just
branding opportunities. (Yes, NBC News has an
app ).
Others rely on upgraded subscriptions, like
OKCupid, or in-game purchases for revenue —
sometimes to the consternation of parents who are
forced to pay for their children's "Smurfberry"
addiction . There are also plenty of apps that want to
follow the Instagram model and hook millions of
users with a cool concept before introducing
advertising.
Regardless of the reasons why, there are a lot of
amazing apps — like Ultravisual , Duolingo and
Venmo — that you can download now without
spending a cent.
Even if a company can create an app that people
might like, getting it to consumers is another
problem. As the Gartner study notes, people are
"increasingly turning to recommendation engines,
friends, social networking or advertising to discover
mobile applications rather than sorting through the
thousands of mobile apps available."
Unless you have a big social media presence and
plenty of ad dollars, it can be hard to break into the
mainstream.
"There are so many applications that are free and
that will never directly generate revenue," Ken
Dulaney, vice president at Gartner, wrote in the
study . "This is only going to get worse in the future
when there will be even greater competition,
especially in successful markets."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered the tech beat for
TIME's Techland and wrote about politics as a staff
writer at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on
Twitter at @kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 30
Do we need cyber
warfare treaties?
Study looks at legacy
of Stuxnet
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:54 PM ET
Over the last few years, Iran, China and the United
States have all deployed weapons capable of
damaging physical infrastructure, all without a
single explosion.
Unlike conventional weapons, these cyberweapons
aren't restricted by international treaties — partly
because governments know so little about their
neighbors' electronic arsenals.
Advertise
"With nuclear weapons, we at least had some idea
from satellites about how many weapons the Soviet
Union had and what they were capable of," Robert
Axelrod, a political scientist at the University of
Michigan, told NBC News. "Cyberweapons are
different. They can be stockpiled with other
countries knowing it, causing them to be more
frightened than they need to be, or not frightened
enough."
A new study from Axelrod and fellow University of
Michigan researcher Rumen Iliev tries to shed
some light on why governments choose to launch
cyberattacks, the timing behind them, and what kind
be done to prevent them from getting out of hand.
Iran reportedly launched a cyberattack against
Saudi Arabia oil firm Aramco in 2012. China has
been accused of doing the same against the U.S.
government computer systems.
But the most famous attack almost certainly
originated in the United States. In 2010, Stuxnet
made headlines.
It seemed like the perfect computer worm. For 17
months, it sped up the centrifuges at Iran's nuclear
enrichment center in Natanz while undetected,
damaging but not destroying them. Then, quietly, it
self-destructed.
In the end, Stuxnet temporarily disabled one-fifth of
the facility's centrifuges, setting back Iran's nuclear
program by two years, cyberdefense expert Ralph
Langner said in Foreign Policy. It was a big win for
for U.S. and Israeli intelligence — who, according to
documents leaked by former NSA contractor
Edward Snowden , developed the worm together.
"The capabilities that were employed in Stuxnet
were far beyond the capabilites of what individual
hackers could do," Axelrod said.
Escape into the wild
The problem? Stuxnet escaped from Iran, possibly
on somebody's laptop. Now it's out in the wild,
available to both foreign governments and individual
hackers who might want to attack anything from
water treatment plants to electrical grids to other
nuclear power plants.
If U.S. intelligence officials had used Axelrod and
Iliev's model, they probably would not have chosen
a different path, said Axelrod, mostly because the
people who created it had to move fast. Stuxnet
depended on exploiting at least three different
vulnerabilities in Iran's nuclear facilities, any of
which could have been fixed by the time the worm
was deployed.
That short time window, the high stakes involved
with delaying Iran's nuclear program and the ability
of Stuxnet to operate undetected for so long made it
seem like a good idea at the time. (Axelrod's study
breaks down these factors down into "persistence,"
"stealth" and "stakes" — basically, whether a
cyberattack needs to be used quickly before
becoming irrelevant, whether an attack will be
useless later if used immediately and whether the
stakes are high enough to risk the blowback from
an attack).
Stuxnet certainly met its objective — delaying Iran's
nuclear progress. But its "escape" was probably
unforeseen, said Axelrod, and is just one of the
many dangers of letting cyber conflicts go
unregulated.
The model he developed could help countries at
least begin a dialogue about what is acceptable and
what isn't, possibly leading to a ban on attacking
things like civilian or banking infrastructure, Axelrod
said.
Advertise
"I think it could lead countries to realize that that
they can't exactly judge another country's
capabilities on what they see on a day-to-day
basis," he said. "That makes any kind of established
norms or agreements on limiting the use of
cyberweapons more valuable."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered technology for TIME's
Techland and wrote about politics as a staff writer
at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on Twitter at
@kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 11
Google acquires Nest
Labs for $3.2B
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:33 PM ET
Google has acquired Nest Labs, the company
founded by iPod creator Tony Fadell, for $3.2 billion.
The smart home startup makes a digital thermostat
as well as smoke detector.
Share on Facebook
Snapchat: Sorry about
the spam (but it's not
hack-related)
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:19 PM ET
Hot on the heels of a huge leak of user data, image-
sharing app Snapchat is reportedly experiencing
above-average levels of spam. The company said it
was sorry in a short blog post Monday.
"We want to apologize for any unwanted Snaps and
let you know our team is working on resolving the
issue," read the post. "As far as we know, this is
unrelated to the Find Friends issue we experienced
over the holidays."
Advertise
The "issue" was a security flaw that allowed
hackers to scrape around 4.6 million user names
and phone numbers from the service's databases.
The company had had ample warning and claimed
just before the breach that it had taken
countermeasures.
A recent update to the app should help lock things
down, but the spam will likely continue as "the
consequence of a quickly growing service," as the
blog post put it — unless, of course, users select the
option to only receive pictures and videos from
friends.
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 1
The 'smart life': How
connected cars,
clothes and homes
could fry your brain
Jan. 13, 2014 at 4:03 PM ET
Welcome to the "smart life." Brain cells, beware.
It's an entirely wired existence where your Pebble
smart watch is connected to your smartphone,
which communicates with Google Glass, which can
send commands to your Internet-enabled
refrigerator and robotic vacuum — all from the
comfort of your iOS-equipped car. Sound like a bit
much?
Sure, that vision of the future might seem like an
amalgam of over-hyped tech trends. But it's
probably coming sooner than most people think.
Take "smart homes," connected houses filled with
light bulbs, security systems, appliances and TVs
that talk to each other and their owner, either
through a smartphone or directly through voice and
gesture commands. They aren't a "Jetsons"
fantasy; in fact, they could be relatively common in
five years, said Dr. Sanjay Sarma, director of digital
learning at MIT.
Advertise
And while " wearables" — including wearable
gadgets like Google Glass, smart watches, fitness
trackers and even sensor-equipped socks — aren't
the norm right now, Juniper Research predicts that
the size of the market will explode from $1.4 billion
in 2013 to $19 billion in 2018.
The car of the future will also probably be
connected. Google announced partnerships with
Audi, GM, Honda and Hyundai to bring Android
information and entertainment systems to
dashboards starting this year. Apple announced a
similar deal with BMW and Mercedes-Benz in June.
By 2020, 60 to 70 percent of cars sold in the United
States could be equipped with Android, iOS or some
other operating system, said Dr. Egil Juliussen, a
principal analyst at research firm IHS.
This is on top of the smartphones that are already
out there. Smartphone subscriptions are expected
to jump from 1.3 billion last year to 5.9 billion in
2019, according to a study from Ericsson .
It all seems like a techie's dream, but the "smart
life" could have unintended consequences.
"The problem is that your brain didn't evolve to
process all of that information at the same time,"
Earl Miller, professor of neuroscience at MIT, told
NBC News. "We evolved in an environment where
every new sight or noise was important — it could
mean a predator was about to leap out of the
bushes and eat you."
An email alert on a person’s smart watch isn't life
or death. But the human brain can't help but pay
attention to it, which could be a problem when five
other devices are vying for its attention.
Even when people think they're multitasking, what
they are really doing is switching between tasks,
not doing them simultaneously. And constant
exposure to multiple devices at the same time isn't
making people any better at it.
"The more stuff you have, the less you are able to
focus on individual things," Miller said. "There is
very limited bandwidth for conscious thought."
That assertion has been backed by several studies,
including one from Stanford researchers that found
that heavy multitaskers were worse at filtering out
distractions and focusing on a single task.
Not to condemn the "smart life" as entirely bad
thing. Organizing the household, communicating
with friends and family, and accessing information
— whether it's maps or obscure facts or whether or
not there is any beer in the fridge — will be easier
than ever before.
"Personally, I'm a technophile," said Edward Vogel,
a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the
University of Oregon. "There are a lot of positives to
this technology. Google Glass and other devices
have the potential to augment our world and help us
quickly make more informed decisions."
Advertise
The problem, Vogel said, was that tasks that require
more contemplation and sustained focus could
become more difficult.
That’s particularly bad news at high speeds.
The dangers of texting and operating a vehicle are
obvious. In 2008, texting was the most likely cause
of a train accident that killed 25 people in Southern
California.
But studies and multiple experts have claimed that
even hands-free communication distracts drivers
from the road. That is because people overestimate
their ability to multi-task, Miller said, causing them
to believe that that the highway is clear only to
crash into another car while giving voice commands
to their smart glasses.
In the end, however, the only solution to technology
overload, especially when driving, might be even
more technology.
"People love technology and having this constant
connectedness to the rest of the world. We are
never going to put that genie back in the bottle,"
Vogel said. "The only way we are going to be safe
when it comes to transportation is once Google
perfects the self-driving car."
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered technology for TIME's
Techland and wrote about politics as a staff writer
at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on Twitter at
@kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 65
Mobile app use
doubles, social apps
triple in 2013: Report
Jan. 13, 2014 at 2:41 PM ET
The mobile world is growing at breakneck pace,
according to the latest data from app analytics
company Flurry: usage of apps on average doubled
over the last year, and some categories posted
even greater gains.
It's important to note that this data is not per user,
but total — in other words, much of the growth
comes from more people getting smartphones, not
just from people opening apps more.
Advertise
Even so, the rate of increase is remarkable,
especially that of the "messaging and social"
category of apps, which grew in use by 203 percent
during 2013. This includes the obvious players, like
Twitter and Facebook, but also new and promising
chat apps and platforms like WhatsApp and China's
WeChat.
Such apps are both replacing SMS and providing
new and interesting ways for mobile users to
interact, from trading silly videos in Snapchat to
doing group audio without using up valuable
minutes.
"Utilities and productivity" also saw a major uptick
as more phones continue to grow as tools for work:
secure email, shared documents, remote access,
and other office-friendly tasks are being used more
than ever.
Flurry's data set was enormous: the company
tracked 4.7 billion app "sessions" (i.e. opening email
to read or send something) in one day, and over the
year had amassed 1.126 trillion to mine for data. As
the company says on its blog, "if the first few days
of January are any indication, the mobile world is
looking at another major growth year."
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 0
Push is on to get ‘kill
switch’ into
smartphones
Jan. 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM ET
Everyone wants a smartphone, especially muggers.
Smartphone thefts now account for 30 percent to 40
percent of all robberies nationwide, according to the
Secure Our Smartphones (S.O.S.) Initiative , a
coalition of police, prosecutors, lawmakers and
consumer advocates. The group claims about 1.6
million people were attacked for their phones in
2012.
Law enforcement believes technology exists – the
so-called “kill switch” – to stop this epidemic of
crime by removing the economic incentive for
stealing these expensive phones.
If activated, the kill switch would permanently lock
the phone, making it inoperable on any network
anywhere in the world.
Phone manufacturers and wireless carriers at odds
Apple now has the “ Activation Lock ” feature on its
new iOS 7 operating system. And Samsung has
developed kill switch technology for Android
phones. But so far, the option has not been
deployed and critics blame the nation’s wireless
carriers for blocking it.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, co-
chair of the S.O.S. Initiative, called it “disturbing”
that the nation’s leading smartphone carriers
knowingly dismissed technology that could save
lives. He’s suggested they might not want a kill
switch because they receive so much money from
companies that sell phone insurance.
“My office will determine whether these companies
allowed their business relationships to influence
their ability to take immediate action against theft,”
Schneiderman said in a news release .
Last June, S.O.S. called on wireless carriers and
phone manufacturers to “put public safety before
corporate profits” by implementing this kill switch
technology on all new phones within a year.
Mark Leno , a California state senator from San
Francisco, refuses to wait any longer. The Democrat
plans to introduce a bill in the next few weeks that
would require a kill switch in all new smartphones
sold in California.
“It is time to act on this serious public safety threat
to our communities,” Leno said. “Criminals know
there is a very valuable device on most people
walking down the street. To address these crimes,
we have to take some bold action and that’s what
this bill would do.”
Leno wants the kill switch to be something that’s
already part of every new phone, not something you
have to download, even if it’s free. For this to be a
deterrent, he said, criminals must know every new
phone has a kill switch.
San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon, a
founding member of the S.O.S. Initiative, supports
the Leno bill because he believes this could prompt
the industry to come up with a solution before it is
forced to do something.
"If the industry doesn't move ahead, the
manufacturers and carriers who are refusing to
work on this technological solution, then we will
have a legislative process they will have to deal
with," Gascon said.
What have the wireless carriers done?
CTIA speaks for the wireless industry. Michal
Altschul, CTIA’s senior vice president and general
counsel, said its member companies have moved
“as quickly as possible” to solve the theft problem.
In a statement to NBC News, Altschul said they are
working to develop a “proactive, multifaceted
approach of databases, technology, consumer
education and legislation and international
partnerships to remove the aftermarket for stolen
phones.”
For example, there are now databases that blacklist
stolen smartphones so they cannot be reactivated
again in the U.S. CTIA also supports a bill in
Congress from Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) that
would impose tough penalties on those who steal or
illegally modify mobile devices.
Here’s what the big four wireless companies have
to say:
T-Mobile is exploring tools and technologies to end
the risk of device theft, including a kill switch option.
Sprint said “numerous concerns and technical
details” need to be reviewed before a kill switch
could be preloaded onto devices. One of those
concerns is that a kill switch could be “exploited by
hackers or terrorists.”
AT&T did not respond directly, referring us to the
industry association.
Verizon seems to be the most amenable to this
technology. The company told us it “supports” a
free kill switch application for Android devices.
“Once a manufacturer provides us an Android ‘kill
switch’ that is free to consumers we will work to
provide it to our customers,” wrote Verizon
spokesman Scott Charleston.
Tyler Shields, an expert on mobile security at
Forrester Research, said phone carriers are
attempting to balance security against customer
convenience.
“The wireless carriers are trying to defend their
ability to have the ultimate best customer
experience without having to generally put in too
much security,” Shields said.
After all, we buy these cool phones for the bells and
whistles, not security.
Where do we go from here?
Things seem to be progressing, even if that’s a bit
slower than some would like. But there are many
important issues that still need to be decided:
Can the solution be software-based?
Tom Kemp, CEO of Centrify, a software and cloud
security provider, believes most software-based kill
switches have limitations because criminals can
find a way around them.
“If you really want the full solution, it needs to be
some sort of hardware chip that completely bricks
the phone and some genius needs to figure out the
right way to do that,” Kemp said.
Should the kill switch permanently destroy the
phone?
Someone who loses a phone and uses the kill
switch would need to buy a new one. On the other
hand, if that phone is not permanently bricked, it
could be shipped overseas and activated there –
making the crime profitable.
Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him
on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan
website.
Share on Facebook Discuss 160
Up close and very
personal: 4K porn is
becoming a reality
Jan. 13, 2014 at 10:56 AM ET
Get ready for 4K porn. In the wake of Netflix
and YouTube announcing that they would start
streaming in ultra-high definition, porn
production company Naughty America unveiled
its plan to offer adult entertainment at four
times the resolution of regular 1080p HD.
Right now, few consumers have displays
capable of streaming 4K , but that could change
in 2014. At the Consumer Electronics Show
(CES) in Las Vegas, both Vizio and Polaroid
showed off 4K TVs that cost under $1,000. Dell
announced a new 4K display monitor priced at
only $699.
Advertise
Before the technology becomes widespread, it
makes sense for smaller companies to wait before
investing in expensive 4K camera equipment and
the massive server space needed to host extra-
large files. Naughty America plans to cover its costs
by charging an extra $10 on top of the $24.95 it
charges for an HD monthly subscription, according
to the Wall Street Journal . Another adult film
company, Huccio, also announced 4K streaming in
October.
While it might seem like a niche industry, online
pornography accounts for 8.3 percent of all web
traffic in the United States, meaning there are plenty
of potential customers who might pony up extra
cash to watch ultra-high definition NSFW content.
Despite all of the new 4K displays on the market,
consumers still need a computer capable of
streaming uncomfortably detailed video at home.
Those don't come cheap. Even top-of-the-line
computers rarely have the memory and graphics
cards capable of smoothly running 4K video. One
exception: The new Mac Pro , which starts at $3,000
and can support up to three 4K displays.
Are there people out there willing to spend that
much money on porn? Considering that it's a $14
billion industry , there is a good chance that the
answer is yes.
Keith Wagstaff writes about technology for NBC
News. He previously covered technology for TIME's
Techland and wrote about politics as a staff writer
at TheWeek.com. You can follow him on Twitter at
@kwagstaff and reach him by email at:
Keith.Wagstaff@nbcuni.com
Share on Facebook Discuss 1
Reuters sources:
Other US retailers
victims of
cyberattacks
Jan. 12, 2014 at 7:39 AM ET
BOSTON/WASHINGTON -- Target Corp and Neiman
Marcus are not the only U.S. retailers whose
networks were breached over the holiday shopping
season late last year, according to sources familiar
with attacks on other merchants that have yet to be
publicly disclosed.
Smaller breaches on at least three other well-
known U.S. retailers took place and were
conducted using similar techniques as the one on
Target, according to the people familiar with the
attacks. Those breaches have yet to come to light.
Also, similar breaches may have occurred earlier
last year.
The sources said that they involved retailers with
outlets in malls, but declined to elaborate. They also
said that while they suspect the perpetrators may
be the same as those who launched the Target
attack, they cannot be sure because they are still
trying to find the culprits behind all of the attacks.
Law enforcement sources have said they suspect
the ring leaders are from Eastern Europe, which is
where most big cyber crime cases have been
hatched over the past decade.
Only one well-known retailer, Neiman Marcus, has
said that they too have been victim of a cyber attack
since Target's December 19 disclosure that some
40 million payment card numbers had been stolen in
a cyber attack. On Friday, Target said an
investigation found that hackers stole the personal
information of at least 70 million customers,
including names, mailing addresses, telephone
numbers and email addresses.
Neiman Marcus said it was not sure if the breach
was related to the Target incident.
Most states have laws that require companies to
contact customers when certain types of personal
information is compromised. In many cases the
task of notification falls on the credit card issuer.
Merchants are required to report breaches when
certain types of personal information, including
social security numbers are compromised. It was
not immediately clear if that was the case with the
retailers who were attacked around the same time
as Target.
The Secret Service and Department of Justice,
which are investigating the Target breach, declined
comment.
Related:
Neiman Marcus hack affected customers' credit
cards
'Worst breach in history' puts data-security
pressure on retail industry
Cost of data breach could give Target sticker shock
Copyright 2014 Thomson Reuters.
Share on Facebook Discuss 54
Wear, stare and
share: The gadgets of
CES
Jan. 10, 2014 at 7:44 PM ET
This year's Consumer Electronics Show was full of
interesting technology (and a few interesting
characters) — but the show is so big and busy that
it's hard to remember just what exactly that tech
was. Here are the bits of CES we found most
memorable.
Wearable technology - The most visible trend this
year was wearables , but not just the usual step-
tracking fitness bands. Existing wearables are
getting smarter, like Sony's SmartBand , which pulls
in pictures and updates from social networks to
integrate with your physical activity. And although
the smartwatches on display were largely
forgettable, the well-received Pebble got a nice-
looking, waterproof metal upgrade.
Advertise
The personal health aspect of wearables is getting
emphasized, as well. The June wristband keeps
track of your UV exposure, and Reebok's
Checklight monitors head movements during sports
to warn of possible concussions (scroll past the
weirder wearable tech in this article to read more).
4K TVs - If you asked anybody at Samsung, Sony,
LG, Sharp, Vizio or a dozen other companies, they
would tell you that the hottest new thing at CES is
ultra high-definition TVs. With four times the pixels
of 1080p, these 4K sets are indeed sharp as a tack
— though some experts say the difference is almost
imperceptible when you're watching from a normal
distance. You can probably see it with a 20-inch
tablet on your lap, though.
The other concern is that there isn't much in the
way of content for 4K TVs. After all, even Hollywood
features are often shot at far lower resolution than
that, and few channels or devices support it (and
most Americans still own a VCR). But Netflix is
getting behind 4K , at least with the shows that have
the budget to shoot in UHD, like "House of Cards."
High-tech toys - The older generation may yearn
for the days when kids were entertained by a stick
and a piece of string, but today's tots are getting a
bit more than that — for example, Bluetooth-
controlled paper airplanes . We also were charmed
by the Ozobot, which follows lines drawn on devices
or paper and responds to color-based commands.
And the Moss robotic building blocks promise
LEGO-like possibilities, creating remote-control
cars while learning the rudiments of programming.
Polaroid's C3 camera may not be a toy, strictly
speaking, but it sure looks like one — maybe it
could be baby's first camera.
Celebrity drama - What's a big show like CES
without a couple high-profile mishaps? Trash-
talking T-Mobile CEO John Legere, just before
announcing a plan to pay families to break their
contracts with AT&T and Verizon, was kicked
out of an AT&T party at the Palms. Why was he
at his competitor's soiree? "I just wanted to
hear Macklemore."
And who can forget director Michael Bay's
incredibly awkward, stammering walkout (right,
in GIF form) in the middle of Samsung's press
event? He later apologized and explained, but
at the time it was mystifying and more than a little
uncomfortable to watch.
Gaming's next steps - The Xbox One and
PlayStation 4 have just come out, but that doesn't
mean nothing else is happening in gaming. A new
prototype virtual reality headset from Oculus VR
made a splash despite not even having a booth —
believe us when we say it's immersive, and miles
beyond the already-impressive original.
The PlayStation Now super-simple streaming
service and Valve's Steam Machines make it easier
than ever to put games in your living room. The
shape of gaming is changing — and these
companies are at the forefront.
Everything else - There is a lot of stuff at CES, but
not everything falls under the few categories above.
E-cigarettes , for instance, are taking off in terms of
tech and sales. Your iPhone is now a thermal
camera. A smart home means that from your fridge
to your mattress , every item in your home might
soon have a chip in it. And then, of course, there
were the dozen or more 3-D printers and scanners
on display.
Devin Coldewey is a contributing writer for NBC
News Digital. His personal website is coldewey.cc .
Share on Facebook Discuss 2
Smart Rifle never
misses, now comes in
semi-automatic form
Jan. 10, 2014 at 5:59 PM ET
In the near future, you won't even need to know
how to fire a rifle to be a crack shot.
At the Consumer Electronic Show, the Austin,
Texas-based start-up TrackingPoint showed off its
all-new 500 Series AR Smart Rifle, a gun that
makes it almost impossible for any user to miss.
(Read more : Now there's a gun that let's you shoot )
TrackingPoint is the inventor of Precision Guided
Firearms, a guided shooting system that the
company says creates the most accurate guns in
the world. The new rifle is the company's first
semi-automatic series.
Advertise
This technology turns even a neophyte into a
marksman, at least within a 500-yard range. The
user simply "tags" the target, and the gun and
ammo do the rest, all for a mere $9,950—the
starting price for the new series.
In fact, the system is so accurate that a user will
have up to five times the accuracy of an
experienced shooter, said Oren Schauble, the
company's marketing director.
(Read more : CES 2014: Big movers beyond the
headlines)
The gun can track a target moving at up to 10 mph
and allows for rapid engagement, meaning a person
can shoot multiple targets quickly.
But TrackingPoint doesn't want people to think of it
as just a fancy gun maker. The company is really
focused on the technology inside the gun, Schauble
said.
"Firearms have been the same for decades, the
same old design in guns and ammunition," he said.
"What defines our product from the rest of the
marketplace is our firearms integrate technology.
We always try to ask ourselves, what in the
technology space has not been applied to the arms
space and how can we do it?"
TrackingPoint, which rolled out its first Precision
Guided Firearm last year, doesn't just include the
technology for a perfect shot. It also integrates
other technological functions into it, such as video
capabilities and Wi-Fi connectivity. These features
allow users to record their hunting expeditions and
even share the footage on social media platforms,
like Facebook and YouTube.
Comments