
<?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 / orvalluppr / All</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 07:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Franken pushes Apple, Google toward privacy policies for apps]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=franken-pushes-apple-google-toward-privacy-policies-for-apps</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=franken-pushes-apple-google-toward-privacy-policies-for-apps</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 07:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>orvalluppr</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=franken-pushes-apple-google-toward-privacy-policies-for-apps</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Sen. Al Franken(Credit:Sen. Al Franken)U.S. Sen. Al Franken wants Apple and Google to require that apps clearly detail their privacy policies so users can better understand what information is being collected. Franken (D-Minn.) sent a letter (PDF) to Apple CEO Steve Jobs and Google CEO Larry Page this morning thanking them for sending company representatives to his hearing on mobile privacy earlier in the month. Franken also followed up on a request made during that hearing to make privacy policies &quot;clear and understandable,&quot; saying there was work to be done to get that information out there in the first place. &quot;Unfortunately, neither of your companies requires that apps on your stores have a privacy policy. As a result, a significant portion, and potentially a majority of apps, on your stores lack privacy policies,&quot; Franken wrote. Consumers &quot;want more transparency and control about who is getting their information, how it is being used, and who it is being shared with.&quot; Franken cited studies by TRUSTe and Harris Interactive, as well as The Wall Street Journal, which noted that many popular applications did not contain links to privacy policies, with others not having a policy to begin with.&quot;Requiring that each app in your stores have a clear, understandable privacy policy would not resolve most of the privacy concerns in the mobile market,&quot; Franken wrote. &quot;But it would be a simple first step that would provide users, privacy advocates, and federal consumer protection authorities a minimum of information about what information an app will access and how that app will share that information with third parties.&quot; Franken's hearing earlier this month followed the high-profile coverage of the location database discovered in Apple's iOS. That tracking file, which contained information about Wi-Fi hot spots and cell towers, was well-known in the forensics and law enforcement community, but questions arose as to what Apple's intentions were. Following a flurry of media and government attention to the matter, Apple explained that the file was a smaller part of a location database used by its devices to more quickly determine their location. Apple also tipped its strategic hand slightly in mentioning that the company had plans to use the file to provide detailed traffic information as part of a future service. Apple then drastically scaled back on the size of the database that's stored on the device, as well as taking measures to let users delete any local database files, along with promising to encrypt the information in a future iOS update. Besides Apple, Google and Facebook were called to provide testimony at not only Franken's hearing but also at a separate subcommittee hearing, which took place last week. That hearing also focused on location privacy and its place on mobile devices.Like Apple and Google, Microsoft collects records of the physical locations of customers who use its mobile operating system, though it has not been targeted in any Senate committee hearings.Franken closed his letter by saying that &quot;at minimum&quot; Apple and Google should require location-aware apps to have privacy policies that spell out what location information is being collected, how it's being used, and how it's shared with third parties. &quot;Apple and Google have each said time and again that they are committed to protecting users' privacy,&quot; Franken wrote. &quot;This is an easy opportunity for your companies to put that commitment into action.&quot; <br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Kibot the robot entertains kids, spies on them]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=kibot-the-robot-entertains-kids-spies-on-them</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=kibot-the-robot-entertains-kids-spies-on-them</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 07:10:18 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>orvalluppr</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=kibot-the-robot-entertains-kids-spies-on-them</guid>
<description><![CDATA[A child tries out Kibot the robot playmate during a launch event in Seoul. (Credit:AFP Photo/Jung Yeon-Je)Korean children, already fast becoming a robot-friendly lot, have a new companion in Kibot, a monkey-faced bot that can read fairy tales, sing songs, take pictures, and make video calls via a display embedded in its tummy.  Wireless operator KT Telecom started delivering the multitasking monkey today for 485,000 won ($447), plus wireless packages that can be purchased in 12- or 14-month installments.  &quot;It's really cute,&quot; said my 9-year-old friend Stella, a co-worker's daughter who visited CNET's offices today. &quot;I would get one if it was in blue.&quot; (No luck' for now, it only comes in pink and gray).  Kibot (short for &quot;kid's robot&quot;) isn't just for kids, however. Parents can also remotely control the 8-inch-tall wheeled robot via mobile phone and, using Wi-Fi, monitor their children (a feature that made Stella a tad apprehensive). &quot;If I was sleeping, it wouldn't be that comfortable if I knew someone was watching me,&quot; she said. &quot;It would be freaky.&quot;  Big brother (or father) concerns aside, Stella thinks the robot playmate--which is aimed at kids younger than she is, 3 to 7--would be a hoot to have around.  She was especially excited by the video chat function, which lets kids make calls via the 1.3-megapixel front-facing camera simply by touching an RFID card bearing the picture of a familiar face (Mom, Dad, Grandma, Grandpa, and so on) to the device.  Kibot, which runs on a rechargeable battery and is manufactured by iRiver, has plenty of other tricks up its sensor-enabled sleeves, too.  It responds to gestures, like pats, by turning and pleasantly saying, &quot;It feels good.&quot; When it encounters an obstacle, it can change direction to avoid it. It can take pictures and record and play back customized voices. It even serves as a language tutor for Korean and English. About the only things it doesn't do, seemingly, are scratch its head and swing from branch to branch. Kibot has a 3.5-inch display in its tummy. (Credit:KT Telecom) The Kibot home page (in Korean) offers about 300 children's songs, fairy tales, and animations. Upon purchasing Kibot, buyers automatically get 55 pieces of content' they can then select and download 10 additional pieces of media free of charge each month.  Robots and kids are not a new combination, of course. Telepresence robots have helped sick children attend school, and bots have babysat and been used to teach autistic children social skills and assist youngsters with motor deficits.  While KT Telecom is primarily touting Kibot as an entertainment and communications hub and not a therapeutic device, it's also promoting it as a socialization tool.  &quot;Before going to bed, my child puts Kibot by his bedside, and looks at it, and then falls asleep,&quot; said a mother of a 4-year-old boy. &quot;Actually, he used not to fall asleep without me beside him. Nowadays, strangely enough, he sleeps alone well.&quot; <br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Mefeedia: HTML5-compatible video on the rise]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=mefeedia-html5-compatible-video-on-the-rise</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=mefeedia-html5-compatible-video-on-the-rise</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 08:10:14 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>orvalluppr</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=mefeedia-html5-compatible-video-on-the-rise</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The debate between using Adobe Flash or HTML5 for online videos could be winding down, but the war among different video formats is heating up.A whopping 63 percent of all videos on the Web are now HTML5-compatible, compared to only 10 percent just a year ago, according to video-sharing site Mefeedia. Instead of relying solely on Flash to display their videos, many more Web sites are adopting video formats that can run directly in HTML5-compatible browsers.The majority of the sites uncovered by Mefeedia are using H.264, the most common video format since it's also compatible for playback using Flash. Google's VP8, or WebM, video codec is second on the popularity charts, followed by Ogg, aka Ogg Theora.With Apple's no-Flash requirement, Mefeedia says that sites such as YouTube, Daily Motion, Blip TV, and Vimeo are among those striving to support video on iOS devices. Specifically, mobile devices now represent 5 percent of the traffic to Mefeedia's site, up from 1 percent a year ago.Although HTML5 has shot up in popularity as an alternative to Flash, the array of video codes supported within HTML5 are themselves battling for dominance. H.264 may currently be the most common among the three on the Web, but lately it's divided different companies against each other.Google recently dropped a bombshell by announcing it would no longer support H.264 in its Chrome browser and would instead push for its own WebM codec. Many in the industry decried the decision, but Google justified it by saying that H.264 carries with it some hefty royalty fees, while WebM is open source. Apple and Microsoft are members of a patent pool called MPEG-LA that actually licenses the code for H.264, while Mozilla and Opera are stuck paying the licensing fees.The debate over HTML5 video formats is one that could be with us for awhile. This means that for the time being, many Web sites will need to continue to support more than one format for their videos. In Mefeedia's eyes, &quot;Web video is maturing and becoming more complex.&quot;To compile its findings, Mefeedia analyzed the videos indexed on its site (around 30 million from more than 30,000 video sites). The index includes videos from such content partners as Hulu, CBS, and ABC as well as videos from YouTube, Vimeo, and DailyMotion. Mefeedia specifically looked at videos that can play within HTML5's &quot;video&quot; tag, which in most cases means videos encoded using H.264.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
