
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Haaze.com / kerngesund / All</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 07:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Report: U.S. to issue terror alerts via Facebook, Twitter]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=report-u-s--to-issue-terror-alerts-via-facebook-twitter</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=report-u-s--to-issue-terror-alerts-via-facebook-twitter</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 07:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>kerngesund</dc:creator>
<category>Politics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=report-u-s--to-issue-terror-alerts-via-facebook-twitter</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The Department of Homeland Security&amp;39's notoriously perplexing color-coded alert system.(Credit:Wikipedia)The Department of Homeland Security plans to replace its color-coded, five-level system of terrorism alerts with a new two-tiered approach later this month and will issue some public alerts via Facebook and Twitter, according to a report.The Associated Press said it had obtained a confidential, departmental document outlining the plan, which, though not yet finalized, should go into effect by April 27.According to the AP, the new plan will ditch the notoriously perplexing, green-to-red, low risk&amp;8211'to&amp;8211'severe risk system put in place in 2002 with a two-level system that labels threats as either &quot;elevated&quot; or &quot;imminent.&quot;The department is hoping to make the system more usable and accessible. And it seems to be responding, in part, to recommendations such as those made in a report issued in 2009 by the Homeland Security Advisory Council.At that time, hacker Jeff Moss, organizer of the Defcon hacking conference and a then-new appointee to the advisory council, told CNET's Elinor Mills that the council had suggested, among other things, that Homeland Security: reduce the number of threat levels'localize warnings and include more details (without jeopardizing law-enforcement efforts)'automatically lower a status level if no terrorist activity had occurred'and use various avenues, including social media, to spread the word.Moss said then: Let's say there's another [Hurricane] Katrina, a huge weather alert, or a terrorist attack, and you want to get the information out to everybody. Right now the only way to do that is to activate the whole emergency broadcast system or the emergency action system and have everybody's radio tell you--which they didn't even use during the World Trade Center attacks...I have one of those emergency weather radios because we get a lot of storms [in Seattle], and my radio is constantly going off telling me about specific storms. [But] it doesn't go off when there's a terrorist attacking my country I just turned it off and threw it away. It's useless.So what if you could have a feed coming from DHS and other government agencies, say, to Twitter or Facebook or MySpace or whatever And you subscribe to that channel or that feed End users would know it's still the official word' it hasn't been modified or changed. There has to be some official ways of distributing this alert information in many different ways. In criticizing the current style of alert, Moss asked, &quot;How does it give [civilians] any actionable information How should we change our behavior based on it&quot; And the AP report suggests that the department is trying to address such questions. The news agency said that in addition to cutting the number of levels from five to two, and tapping social media for alerts &quot;when appropriate,&quot; the department plans to make its warnings more specific and to issue them to more-specific audiences. If, for example, a plot was discovered to hide bombs inside backpacks at airports, instead of issuing a blanket alert, DHS would limit the warning to airports and ask travellers to be extra vigilant in reporting unattended baggage.The AP said the new &quot;elevated&quot; threat level &quot;would warn of a credible threat against the U.S. It probably would not specify timing or targets, but it could reveal terrorist trends that intelligence officials believe should be shared in order to prevent an attack.&quot; And it said the &quot;imminent&quot; level would be reserved for a &quot;credible, specific, and impending terrorist threat or an ongoing attack against the U.S.&quot;Related links &amp;149' Q&amp;A: Defcon's Jeff Moss on cybersecurity, government's role &amp;149' Pentagon, State Department OK social-network useBoth levels of alert would be called off if no terrorist activity ensued: the elevated level would expire after no more than 30 days, the imminent level after no more than 7. Both, however, could be extended if necessary.Any public warnings issued using Facebook, Twitter, or other such outlets would first be communicated to federal, state, and local officials. And some might not be issued to the public at all, if doing so would undermine efforts to head off any attacks, the AP reported.Again, though, the plan could be modified before its implementation. Homeland Security spokeswoman Amy Kudwa told the AP, &quot;The plan is not yet final, as we will continue to meet...with our partners to finalize a plan that meets everyone's needs.&quot;<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[FCC's Net neutrality ruling: Misplaced nostalgia]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fccs-net-neutrality-ruling-misplaced-nostalgia</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fccs-net-neutrality-ruling-misplaced-nostalgia</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 08:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>kerngesund</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fccs-net-neutrality-ruling-misplaced-nostalgia</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Editors' note: This is a guest column. See Larry Downes' bio below.After more than a year of palace dramas worthy of a Shakespeare play, the FCC voted this morning to impose new rules on Internet access providers aimed at &quot;preserving the open Internet.&quot; Today's action is both anticlimactic and incomplete. Despite soap opera hand-wringing the last three weeks from fellow Democratic commissioners, there was little doubt that Chairman Julius Genachowski had the votes he needed to pass this most recent version of the so-called &quot;Net neutrality&quot; rules, which he introduced on December 5. The two Republican commissioners strongly dissented from today's vote.But the commission, in part to incorporate the separate opinions of the commissioners, did not actually publish its order, which has been circulating inside the agency. Rumors are that the final document is close to 100 pages.Different treatment for wired and wireless Internet Still, the agency hinted today at the most important contents. The commission will impose three new rules on Internet access providers, a category that will be defined in the final order.The rules prohibit access providers from blocking lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices. (Blocking illegal fire sharing, which, in part, kicked off the latest version of this long-running drama, is not prohibited.) New transparency rules will require access providers to disclose the details of their network management techniques, something no consumer will likely be able to understand. Today's decision is a Hail Mary pass. It was the Chairman's last hope of passing something and moving on to other important, and languishing, matters, including spectrum reform and the forgotten National Broadband Plan.And, for Internet access provided by the cable or telephone infrastructure, traffic management that &quot;unfairly discriminates&quot; against particular content will be prohibited. Wireless broadband, owing to the current limits of the wireless infrastructure, is exempt from that rule. It is also subject to a more limited blocking rule, one that would allow providers to continue operating &quot;app stores&quot; that require prequalification.In short, the rules adopted today are similar to those proposed by the agency in October 2009, with a few major and some minor differences. The original proposal did not carve out special treatment for wireless, for example. The wording of the discrimination rule has also changed to more closely reflect existing terminology in the FCC's 70-year history of telephone and telegraph regulations and adjudication.The FCC's dubious legal authority What hasn't changed is the fact that the agency probably doesn't have the authority to pass these rules, a problem likely to be tested in future court decisions. In April of this year, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has special jurisdiction over FCC activity, rejected the agency's effort to impose sanctions on Comcast for violating its earlier, less formal open-Internet policy statements. The court found that Congress had simply not given the FCC authority over the traffic management practices of Internet access providers.Today's order relies on the same provisions of the law, known as Title I, that the court in the Comcast case rejected. In the interim, the agency threatened a dubious legal maneuver to bring Internet access under its telephone jurisdiction, known as Title II. That effort was denounced by legal scholars, unions, and a bipartisan majority of Congress. It, too, would likely have failed in court. (The FCC refused today to close its Title II inquiry. It will likely remain in limbo for some time.)Caught between a rock and a hard place, and with a skeptical Republican majority set to take over the House in January, today's decision is a Hail Mary pass. It was the chairman's last hope of passing something and moving on to other important, and languishing, matters, including spectrum reform and the forgotten National Broadband Plan. If carriers decide to challenge the order, the FCC will have to relitigate the Comcast decision without the benefit of any new authority from Congress.A dangerous nostalgia for an Internet long gone All this (and so much more) to solve a problem that hasn't yet materialized. With the exception of a few isolated and quickly dealt with incidents (most of which aren't even covered by today's new rules), Internet access providers have never blocked applications, exacted &quot;toll road&quot; tributes from new content providers, or otherwise shut down the open Internet we all love. Maybe today's rules will help to ensure that the worst-case scenarios painted in lurid colors by the most militant Net neutrality advocates never come to pass.The misplaced nostalgia for an Internet that has long since evolved to something much different and much more useful has led to the adoption today of rules that may have a similar effect. The FCC's embrace of open-Internet rules may indeed preserve the Internet--but preserve it in the same way amber preserves the bodies of prehistoric insects.Or maybe the new rules will have the opposite effect, squashing the enthusiasm for critical private investment in new and improved infrastructure, including fiber optics and 4G networks.But when all is said and done, the real problem with Net neutrality advocacy is that it tries to preserve the Internet as it looked in the mid-1990s--the wild open frontier that captivated so many of us, that inspired the first generation of e-commerce and informational Web sites, and that launched the great Internet bubble and the stock market's &quot;irrational exuberance&quot; that burst in April 2000, the day a federal judge first ruled that Microsoft's browser dominance violated federal antitrust law.Despite the stock market crash and doldrums that followed, the Internet has continued to evolve, expand, and develop new and exciting uses since then. Access speeds accelerate, new software and new applications continue to enter the bloodstream of the Web, and millions of new users have joined in. The Internet is now a worldwide phenomenon, and a continued source of awe and wonder.Even without the FCC's help--or perhaps because of its absence--the ashes of the dot-com flame-out have been cleared by social networking, the mobile Internet, and other so-called Web 2.0 applications, including Facebook, Twitter, theiPhone, Android, and the rest.But to hear the Net neutrality advocates talk, it's still 1999, and the question is whether Yahoo or Alta Vista is the better search engine (Google hadn't yet been invented), or if a 9600 baud modem is fast enough. That was an Internet that didn't include, among others, content delivery networks, voice over Internet Protocol telephony, video services, caching, or co-located servers. That's the real risk of regulating anything having to do with the Internet, or any disruptive technology. Regulation is necessarily static, inflexible, and vague. Rulemaking and adjudication are divorced from technical realities, and they are necessarily political. The history of regulated industries is littered with unfortunate examples of well-intentioned consumer safeguards that froze the status quo of existing players and the antiquated relationships baked into their supply chains. As new technologies create new competitors outside the traditional industry structure, regulators and those they oversee have proven unable to respond to change, destroying value and introducing unnecessary chaos in the transition from one technology base to the next generation. In the United States, the railroad, airline, and banking industries have all suffered these unintended consequences.The misplaced nostalgia for an Internet that has long since evolved to something much different and much more useful has led to the adoption today of rules that may have a similar effect. The FCC's embrace of open-Internet rules may indeed preserve the Internet--but preserve it in the same way amber preserves the bodies of prehistoric insects.That gloomy outcome isn't certain, of course. Internet technology has a wonderful habit of routing around inefficiency and unnecessary obstacles. As between Moore's Law and FCC law, I'm betting on the technology to prove the ultimate regulator--and the sensible one, at that.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Movers and shakers in mobile computing (roundup)]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=movers-and-shakers-in-mobile-computing-roundup</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=movers-and-shakers-in-mobile-computing-roundup</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 08:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>kerngesund</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=movers-and-shakers-in-mobile-computing-roundup</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The D: Dive into Mobile conference offers a look at how things are revving up on portable devices, with appearances by honchos from Google, Microsoft, Spotify, and elsewhere.RIM's Playbook the linchpin of a 10-year planThe QNX software at the heart of Research In Motion's Playbook tablet represents its plan for the next decade, according to the company's co-CEO.(Posted in Relevant Results by Tom Krazit)December 7, 2010 7:00 p.m. PTRubenstein: Palm's ceiling limited without HPFormer Palm CEO Jon Rubenstein is proud of what they accomplished at Palm, but the company faced far too uphill a battle to make it as a solo act.(Posted in Relevant Results by Tom Krazit)December 7, 2010 3:57 p.m. PTDon't expect Spotify in U.S. this holiday seasonThe popular European music service is without a single label deal more than a year after first promising to launch here. All music fans can expect from the company this holiday season is spin.(Posted in Media Maverick by Greg Sandoval)December 7, 2010 3:55 PM PST Microsoft: Windows Phone 7 still work in progressDesigners ofWindows Phone 7 tried to focus on getting the basics right with the first release of the product: better functionality will come later, an executive says.(Posted in Relevant Results by Tom Krazit)December 7, 2010 1:17 p.m. PTGoogle's Rubin shows off unannounced Android tabletAndy Rubin, head of Google's Android project, showed off an unannounced Android tablet running a next-generation OS version with a 3D version of Google Maps.&amp;149'&amp;nbsp'Motorola tablet taps Nvidia for 3D(Posted in Relevant Results by Tom Krazit)December 6, 2010 7:52 p.m. PTGoogle's humbler Nexus S strategy emergesAll the rhetoric about overthrowing the mobile industry was shelved for the launch of Google's Nexus S, which is just an Android phone with a new operating system.&amp;149'&amp;nbsp'Google, Samsung announce Nexus S&amp;149'&amp;nbsp'Photos: Nexus S(Posted in Relevant Results by Tom Krazit)December 6, 2010 1:11 p.m. PTNext-gen Google Maps for Mobile previewed Andy Rubin, head of Google's Android project, showed off an unannounced Android tablet running a next-generation OS version with a 3D version of Google Maps.(Posted in The Car Tech blog  by Antuan Goodwin)December 6, 2010 9:47 p.m. PT.postBody h3, .postBody h4{font-size: 1.2em'margin: 10px 0 0 0 'padding: 0px'font-weight: bold'border-bottom: none'}<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Meet Cloud Picker, Google&'s Stealthy New Storage&nbsp'Product]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=meet-cloud-picker-googlersquos-stealthy-new-storagenbspproduct</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=meet-cloud-picker-googlersquos-stealthy-new-storagenbspproduct</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov -001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>kerngesund</dc:creator>
<category>Latest News</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=meet-cloud-picker-googlersquos-stealthy-new-storagenbspproduct</guid>
<description><![CDATA[What is Google Cloud Picker According to these Blogger Forums, Sites Forums, and others, Google has been testing a new online storage tool called, you guessed it, Cloud Picker.   From these accounts, it appears that the tool is connected somehow to Google Apps, Docs, and Sites, and was presented to users when they tried to insert a file or image into a Google site. When they tried to embed the file, a &amp;''Google Cloud Picker&amp;'' window opened and asked users to log-in to their Google Accounts.Many users flocked to the forums because Cloud Picker wouldn&amp;'t work with any Google Apps account. When used with a regular Gmail account, the Cloud Picker brought users to a Google landing page with &amp;''Profile&amp;'' and &amp;''Personal Settings&amp;'' at the top and &amp;''My Products&amp;'' at the bottom.One user posted an image of Cloud Picker, which does shed a little more light on what the product is. It appears that it is a new storage product that allows users to organize and search photos, documents, videos and more that are stored in the cloud. From the looks of it, it seems more consumer focused as opposed to an enterprise tool.Of course, this is all anecdotal so we are surely missing key elements of Cloud Picker. But when we contacted Google to learn more about the new product, we received this response from a spokesperson:Oops&amp;8230' looks like someone pushed some code too quickly. It&amp;'s not quite ready for prime time yet but stay tuned!So I think we we can expect a product either named Cloud Picker or something similar to Cloud Picker in the near future. CrunchBase InformationGoogleInformation provided by CrunchBase<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
