
<?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 / khruxoen / All</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[U.S. Cellular to launch eight smartphones, two tablets by end of 2011]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=u-s--cellular-to-launch-eight-smartphones-two-tablets-by-end-of-2011</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=u-s--cellular-to-launch-eight-smartphones-two-tablets-by-end-of-2011</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=u-s--cellular-to-launch-eight-smartphones-two-tablets-by-end-of-2011</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Sprint isn't the only one ramping up its lineup today. U.S. Cellular just announced its product road map for the remainder of the year, and it includes eight smartphones and twotablets.Seven of the eight handsets will runAndroid 2.3 Gingerbread and the eighth will be the carrier's firstWindows Phone 7 handset. One of the models among the group will also be U.S. Cellular's first 4G LTE smartphone, due out in November. HTC will provide four of the devices, beginning with the Windows Phone handset due out this summer. This will be followed by two Android phones and a 7-inch tablet in the fall. Meanwhile, Motorola is set to provide a dual-core, 4.3-inch smartphone with world-roaming capabilities (hmm, sounds an awful lot like a phone we saw today). Meanwhile, LG's kicking in one of the &quot;slimmest and lightest&quot; mobiles, complete with a 7-inch touch screen and 1GHz processor. Both the Motorola and LG devices are expected to ship in the fall.Also on tap, two entry-level smartphones from Samsung and Huawei, as well as two QWERTY-equipped messaging phones from Samsung. U.S. Cellular customers, you must be excited by this news, no  <br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Verizon iPhone versus AT&T iPhone: CNET's data winner is... (video)]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=verizon-iphone-versus-att-iphone-cnets-data-winner-is----video</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=verizon-iphone-versus-att-iphone-cnets-data-winner-is----video</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 08:10:51 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=verizon-iphone-versus-att-iphone-cnets-data-winner-is----video</guid>
<description><![CDATA[(Credit:CNET)Faster, sexier, more reliable signal. That's the hype propping up the Apple iPhone 4 for Verizon at the expense of rival carrier AT&amp;amp'T. But is theiPhone really that much better on Verizon than on AT&amp;amp'T The answer so far: absolutely. To test the phones, CNET Senior Editor Kent German and I traipsed all over San Francisco&amp;nbsp'to conduct our field testing showdown between the AT&amp;amp'T and Verizon iPhones. We compared signal strength, upload and download speeds, and load times between the iPhones on the two networks.In addition to the results below, you can also check out more connectivity tests, and this roundup of all things Verizon iPhone.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Reports: Comcast-NBCU deal near approval]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=reports-comcast-nbcu-deal-near-approval</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=reports-comcast-nbcu-deal-near-approval</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Marketing and advertising</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=reports-comcast-nbcu-deal-near-approval</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The deal giving Comcast a controlling stake in NBC Universal could finally be approved by the FCC, followed by the U.S. Department of Justice, as early as this week, according to reports.According to reports in The Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and Hollywood news site The Wrap citing anonymous sources, the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department will finally pave the way for the Comcast-NBC Universal deal to close by the end of the month. The $37 billion merger between the companies has been a long time coming. The deal, which was first announced in 2009, provides Comcast with a 51 percent controlling stake in NBC Universal. General Electric will retain the remaining 49 percent. When the deal was first announced, the companies hoped to have it accepted by regulatory bodies at the end of 2010. However, over the course of the last year, the companies faced increasing concerns that their merger might unfairly impact competing content providers and harm consumers.The Department of Justice, which is also evaluating the merger with regard to antitrust rules, is also expected to vote to approve the joint venture. Both the Justice Department and that FCC stamps of approval are needed before the deal to form the joint venture can close.Even though the FCC is expected to approve the merger, the commission is likely to impose conditions. The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) and the Washington Post have reported that the new joint venture will be required to share NBC content with Internet video providers, such as Netflix, if these companies are getting content from competitors, such as CBS or Walt Disney. The FCC is also expected to require Comcast to abide by new Net neutrality rules set to take effect later this year, the newspapers said. The agreement would require Comcast to adhere to these rules even if the rules established by the FCC, which the FCC passed separately late last year, are challenged in court.Most of the FCC's conditions will last seven years, somewhat longer than other conditions imposed on companies involved in previous merger approvals. One exception is a condition requiring Comcast to offer $49.95 a month standalone Internet service to consumers. The Justice Department is also expected to impose some conditions on the merger. For example, the Justice Department will impose a restriction that won't allow the joint venture to retaliate against its competitors or partners. The Justice Department imposed a similar &quot;anti-retaliatory&quot; provision in the merger between Ticketmaster and Live Nation, the Washington Post reported. In that merger, the Justice Department said that the new ticket company couldn't retaliate against any venue owner that chooses to use another company's ticketing services or promotional services.For Comcast and NBC, this would mean that the joint venture would not be able punish its partners who do business with Comcast's or NBC's competitors. Last February, Comcast CEO Brian Roberts and NBC Universal CEO Jeff Zucker fielded questions from congressional subcommittees over their proposed arrangement. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) was one of the more outspoken critics, saying that his former career with NBC gave him reason to be concerned.&quot;I worked for NBC for many years,&quot; Franken said during a hearing. &quot;And what I know from my previous career has given me reason to be concerned--let me rephrase that, very concerned--about the potential merger of Comcast and NBC Universal.&quot;Those hearings were followed up by Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) writing a letter to the FCC in August saying that it had a responsibility to ensure consumers were being protected. He was especially concerned that Comcast would take freely available NBC programming on services like Hulu and make them exclusively available on the provider's TV Everywhere service, which is available only to its subscribers. (Boucher was defeated in the November election.) Those complaints were echoed by two members of Congress last month in separate letters to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said in his letter to Genachowski that &quot;the joint venture would give Comcast the power, should it choose to exercise it, to deny programming to its cable, satellite, or online competitors or charge inflated prices for it.&quot;Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) told Genachowski that a merger between the companies could &quot;trigger significant changes in the way consumers access video programming, in the way independent programmers distribute their works, and in the way all video distributors compete for customers.&quot; However, even with those issues, both Markey and Waxman told Genachowski that they wanted to see the merger get approved, but not without imposing strict conditions first. CNET News' Maggie Reardon contributed to this report.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[CES: CES: HP Pavilion Elites get new Intel Sandy Bridge CPUs]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=ces-ces-hp-pavilion-elites-get-new-intel-sandy-bridge-cpus</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=ces-ces-hp-pavilion-elites-get-new-intel-sandy-bridge-cpus</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 08:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=ces-ces-hp-pavilion-elites-get-new-intel-sandy-bridge-cpus</guid>
<description><![CDATA[(Credit:HP)Rounding out its retail PC update, Hewlett-Packard will bring five new fixed-configuration Pavilion Elite desktops to market on January 9. Where HP's Pavilion Slimline and Pavilion desktops are more straightforward configurations, the new Pavilion Elite 500 series systems skew towards mainstream gamers and digital media enthusiasts, and those looking for more than just basic productivity-level performance.The new Pavilion Elites uniformly have discrete graphics cards and wireless networking and at minimum a 1.5TB hard drive. That's impressive considering the line starts at $699. But for the baseline HPE-500f, each system also has a Blu-ray drive. For CPUs, three of the units have six-core AMD Phenom II X6 chips, but we'd far prefer either of the two models equipped with a new Intel &quot;Sandy Bridge&quot; Core i5 or Core i7 quad core CPU for their faster all-around performance.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Apple launches tool for creating iAd mobile ads]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apple-launches-tool-for-creating-iad-mobile-ads</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apple-launches-tool-for-creating-iad-mobile-ads</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 08:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apple-launches-tool-for-creating-iad-mobile-ads</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Apple&amp;39's new iAd Producer(Credit:Apple)Apple has rolled out a new tool for developers looking to create ads for iAd, the company's mobile-ad platform.Launched yesterday, the new iAd Producer is designed to help developers create, test, and launch mobile-ad campaigns to run under iAd. Freely available to any paid member of Apple's iOS Developer Program, iAd Producer runs underMac OS X 10. (No word from Apple on a possible Windows version.)The software presents a visual design layout in which developers can specify the device they wish to design for and then see how their ad would flow from page to page. Developers can choose from a variety of templates, components, and animations to build their ads. In the final stages, iAd Producer will validate the ad to track down any errors and then optimize the various files that make up the ad.iAd Producer uses HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript as the technologies behind the ads. Less experienced programmers can stick with the basics to build their ads, while more advanced developers can tap into JavaScript programming and debugging to fine-tune the code behind.By using HTML5 and CSS3, iAd Producer also offers an alternative to Adobe Flash Professional, which many designers traditionally use to build mobile apps and ads. Apple, which has made no secret of its dislike of Flash, has engaged in a word of words with Adobe over such issues as the use of Flash vs. HTML5 as the standard for rich Web content.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google Latitude Finally Comes To The iPhone, Touts 9 Million Active&nbsp'Users]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-latitude-finally-comes-to-the-iphone-touts-9-million-activenbspusers</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-latitude-finally-comes-to-the-iphone-touts-9-million-activenbspusers</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov -001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Latest News</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-latitude-finally-comes-to-the-iphone-touts-9-million-activenbspusers</guid>
<description><![CDATA[It seems that whenever there&amp;'s a discussion around mobile location services, Google Latitude is treated as an also-ran. Foursquare and Facebook Places have been getting most of the buzz, and there&amp;'s also plenty of news around SCVNGR and Gowalla. Latitude, which launched in February 2009, rarely make headlines.But starting today, we&amp;'ll probably start hearing a bit more about Google&amp;'s location-based service. It&amp;'s just launched a full-featured, native application for the iPhone that includes support for background location monitoring a4&quot;a4smarking the first time that the application has been available for the iPhone in a form that wasn&amp;'t severely crippled. Note that this was spotted in Japan&amp;'s App Store a few days ago a4&quot; obviously that was a mistake in the buildup to today&amp;'s launch.Now, Google actually submitted a native Latitude application for iPhone last year, but Apple blocked it and told Google to make it a web application, supposedly to avoid confusion with the Maps app that ships with the iPhone. Of course, a few days later news broke that Apple had also blocked Google Voice, which likely indicates that this was part of an anti-Google trend as opposed to a one-off concern. Now it looks like those issues have been resolved (perhaps with the threat of government intervention).In any case, even if Latitude had been accepted last year, it wouldn&amp;'t have been too exciting, because the iPhone didn&amp;'t allow applications to run in the background (that feature was added in iOS 4.0). With this release, Google writes that it has built the app &amp;''from the ground up using iOS 4a4a4s new multitasking capability to support background updating&amp;''. Which means you&amp;'ll be able to turn it on, and let you automatically share your current location with friends as you go about your day.There&amp;'s also a big stat in Google&amp;'s blog post: Latitude has more than 9 million people actively using the service across a variety of mobile platforms. To put that in perspective, Foursquare just passed 5 million users (thought it hasn&amp;'t said how many are active). I do wonder, though, how many people have set Latitude up and have it running in the background without actually using it to see where their friends are.Even with the new iPhone application, there&amp;'s still the issue of whether people actually like the service. Latitude has a bigger &amp;8216'creepiness&amp;' factor than check-in services like Foursquare, because you aren&amp;'t explicitly telling the application when to share your location with friends. Yes, you can control exactly what you want to share with each of your friends (you can set it to only share your current city, for example), but it obviously takes work to get everything working the way you want it, and there&amp;'s that nagging feeling that you might have messed something up.That said, I think passive location tracking is the future, at least in some form. My hunch is that we&amp;'ll see services monitor your location throughout the day, but that instead of sharing it, it will detect whenever you&amp;'ve gone somewhere out of the ordinary, or are near friends, and then prompt you to share what you&amp;'re doing (essentiallya4spushing suggested check-ins at you). CrunchBase InformationGoogle LatitudeInformation provided by CrunchBase<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Will Facebook ever be rid of the Winklevoss twins]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=will-facebook-ever-be-rid-of-the-winklevoss-twins</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=will-facebook-ever-be-rid-of-the-winklevoss-twins</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov -001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Latest News</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=will-facebook-ever-be-rid-of-the-winklevoss-twins</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins who settled with Facebook two years ago in a dispute over the social network&amp;'s origins, were back in court this week trying to undo the settlement.What makes the case so interesting, besides the inherent drama of the twinsa4a4 accusation that Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg stole their idea, is the fact that Facebook hasna4a4t been able to make the Winklevosses go away. In addition to $20 million in cash, they received Facebook shares that are worth an estimated $150 million now. How much more money do they need Especially since, by asking the courts to throw out the settlement, they could end up with nothingEarlier this afternoon, law professor Steven M. Davidoff cast a skeptical eye on the appeal in The New York Times. There seem to be two parts to Winkelvossesa4a4 legal argument: They claim 1) that the settlement wasna4a4t sufficiently detailed, and 2) that Facebook didna4a4t disclose a low company valuation that made the shares less valuable than the twins believed.On the first point, Davidoff says it has a4Aa surface appeala4, since the settlement was just a two-page document, but he said courts have been willing to enforce these types of agreements in the past. On the second point, VentureBeata4a4s Owen Thomas has argued that Facebook is playing a4Aa dangerous gamea4 by claiming it didna4a4t have any responsibility to provide the correct valuation to potential shareholders. But Davidoff (who &amp;8212' sorry Owen &amp;8212' probably has a little more legal expertise) sides with Facebook, pointing out that the company never provided a valuation to the twins (so there wasna4a4t an incorrect valuation that it needed to correct). The Winklevosses made their own assumption based on a press release. (Yes, really.)Davidoff concludes by saying that the twins can probably squeeze more money out of Facebook but that they should act soon before their legal case evaporates. Then he gets to the big catch: a4ABut this assumes the Winklevosses are economically rational actors and not making the mistake of thinking that the courtroom is going to give them the justice they think they deserve.a4In previous statements, the Winklevosses have suggested that theya4a4re more interested in a4Athe principle a4 that Mark stole the ideaa4 than in making money. That, of course, could be a strategy as well, but the fact that the twins are pursuing this case at all suggests that it might not be. I suspect that what want theya4a4re really pursuing is recognition, either from Facebook or in court, that they were the brains behind Facebook.Next Story: Is Twitter no longer a San Francisco startup Previous Story: Shortages coming for Microsoft&amp;'s Xbox 360, KinectPrintEmailTwitterFacebookGoogle BuzzLinkedIn      DiggStumbleUponRedditDeliciousGoogleMore&amp;8230'          Tags: lawsuitsCompanies: FacebookPeople: Cameron Winklevoss, Mark Zuckerberg, Tyler Winklevoss          Tags: lawsuitsCompanies: FacebookPeople: Cameron Winklevoss, Mark Zuckerberg, Tyler WinklevossAnthony is a senior editor at VentureBeat, as well as its reporter on media, advertising, and social networks. Before joining the site in 2008, Anthony worked at the Hollister Free Lance, where he won awards from the California Newspaper Publishers Association for breaking news coverage and writing. He attended Stanford University and now lives in San Francisco. Reach him at anthony@venturebeat.com. (All story pitches should also be sent to tips@venturebeat.com) You can also follow Anthony on Twitter.VentureBeat has new weekly email newsletters.  Stay on top of the news, and don't miss a beat.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Evidence suggests Stuxnet worm set Iran&'s nuclear program back]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=evidence-suggests-stuxnet-worm-set-iranrsquos-nuclear-program-back</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=evidence-suggests-stuxnet-worm-set-iranrsquos-nuclear-program-back</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov -001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>khruxoen</dc:creator>
<category>Latest News</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=evidence-suggests-stuxnet-worm-set-iranrsquos-nuclear-program-back</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Stuxnet, the computer worm that spread among industrial machinery, is commonly believed to have been created by Israeli and American intelligence forces to take down the nuclear weapons machinery in Iran.The New York Times delved into that topic today in a long story that examines the evidence and reveals new details about the computer worm, which is among the most sophisticated ever created. The story includes some interesting technology details that show just how clever it was and how much damage it may have done to Iran&amp;'s centrifuges, the critical equipment that is used to make fuel for the nuclear facilities in Natanz, Iran. Iranian officials acknowledged that the start-up of the country&amp;'s Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant has been delayed in part because of Stuxnet.While it may have done damage to Iran&amp;'s nuclear program, Stuxnet is also like a genie out of the bottle. Now that it exists, other cybercriminals will seek to take advantage of its techniques in attacking other targets.Stuxnet is a Windows-based computer worm first described by security researchers in Belarus in June 2010. It was unusual in that it targeted industrial systems that use Siemens&amp;' software. Russian security firm Kaspersky Labs said that Stuxnet is a &amp;''prototype of a cyber weapon that will lead to the creation of a new arms race in the world.&amp;'' Kaspersky believes that the worm could only have been created with &amp;''nation-state support.&amp;''One of the purposes of Stuxnet was to send Iran&amp;'s nuclear centrifuges &amp;''spinning wildly out o control,&amp;'' causing irreparable damage. Another clever feature was to record what normal operations at the plant sounded like and then to play the readings back to the plant operators, like a pre-recorded security tape in a bank robbery, so that it would appear &amp;''that everything was operating normally while the centrifuges were actually tearing themselves apart.&amp;'' The ruse prevented a safety system from shutting down the machines.The attacks were only partially successful, but it is possible the worm contains the seeds for more attacks. Stuxnet also faked digital security certificates, something that suggested a sophisticated creator. Digital signatures are certificates for web sites that verify that they  are who they say they are and are malware free. Antivirus software tends  to give a free pass to any software that shows it has a digital  signature certificateThe worm was also evidently transmitted through shared universal serial bus (USB) memory modules, since the centrifuge machines are not connected to the internet.The story suggests that the U.S. government had a hand in identifying the weaknesses of the Siemens software. In 2008, the German company worked with the U.S. Idaho National Library, part of the Energy Department, to identify the holes in Siemens systems. Those holes were exploited by Stuxnet. American and Israeli officials have declined comment on whether they collaborated in creating Stuxnet.The Department of Homeland Security teamed up with the Idaho National Laboratory to study a widely used Siemens industrial controller, known as Process Control System 7, which can control lots of instruments, machines and sensors at the same time. The lab acknowledges it created a report on the cyber-vulnerabilities but did not detail specific flaws.According to WikiLeaks disclosures, the State Department described urgent efforts in April 2009 to stop a shipment of Siemens controllers, contained in 111 boxes at the port of Dubai, from getting to Iran. The United Arab Emirates blocked the transfer of the Siemens computers. Shortly after that, Stuxnet struck. Symantec found it did a lot of damage in Iran but also struck in countries such as India and Indonesia. Symantec&amp;'s Kevin Hogan, a security expert, said that 60 percent of computers infected by Stuxnet at one point were in Iran.A German security researcher, Ralph Langner, discovered that the worm kicked into gear when it detected the presence of a specific configuration of controllers, running a set of processes that appear to exist only in a centrifuge plant. One piece of the code sent commands to 984 machines linked, Langner found. And nuclear inspectors visiting Natanz in late 2009 found that the Iranians had taken out of service exactly 984 machines that were running the previous summer.The New York Times said that Israel likely tested Stuxnet on rows of centrifuge machines running at the secret Dimona complex where Israel makes its nuclear fuel for nuclear weapons, in the midst of the Negev desert. In November, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said a cyberattack had &amp;''caused minor problems with some of our centrifuges.&amp;'' Two Iranian scientists believed to be part of the nuclear program have also been killed in Iran.The whole point of the Stuxnet worm was to disrupt the Iranian program, setting it back a few years, without triggering a war between Israel and Iran. But McAfee said that &amp;''Stuxnet has infected thousands of computers of unintended victims from all over the globe.&amp;''[stuxnet map: UMBC ebiquity]Previous Story: Week in review: Verizon finally has an iPhonePrintEmailTwitterFacebookGoogle BuzzLinkedIn      DiggStumbleUponRedditDeliciousGoogleMore&amp;8230'          Tags: Dimona, StuxnetCompanies: Kaspersky Labs, McAfee, siemens, symantecPeople: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ralph Langer          Tags: Dimona, StuxnetCompanies: Kaspersky Labs, McAfee, siemens, symantecPeople: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ralph LangerDean is lead writer for GamesBeat at VentureBeat. He covers video games, security, chips and a variety of other subjects. Dean previously worked at the San Jose Mercury News, the Wall Street Journal, the Red Herring, the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register and the Dallas Times Herald. He is the author of two books, Opening the Xbox and the Xbox 360 Uncloaked. Follow him on Twitter at @deantak, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.VentureBeat has new weekly email newsletters.  Stay on top of the news, and don't miss a beat.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
