High on the third screen: Twitter as the new Narcissus mirror?

The three screens are wonderful, amazing, fantastic... And catastrophic.
Let's be honest, they have turned us into 24/7 data junkies and broadcasters. Why is it so important to start tagging people on a Facebook "Bucket List"? Why o why do we feel compelled to express our complaints about bad restaurant service on status updates as opposed to writing an actual letter to the place's management? Why is it so important to Twitter that we're getting off-line to go to the supermarket?
The good news (oh, well, not "good", but calming in a sense) is that this tendency is actually affecting all kinds of people, including the exclusive group whose job consists in broadcasting through Screen #1 (Television) everyday events and news.
Not happy with million eyeball ratings, TV journalists are now apparently in need to Twitter (aka: inform) spectators of their every-minute happenings. Is this just 3-screen vanity? Or the new state of breaking news? Katie Couric guaranteeing a breaking news digitally while he she is still off the air?
I thought the piece was quite interesting.
It's not about users and the intern PA's in charge of a show's website. Now it's about the stars (ehem... Journalists) themselves.

"What Are You Doing? Media Twitterers Can’t Stop Typing" by Alessandra Stanley in The New York Times

S. Quiroga

$10,000 To be a Hacker

Pwn2Own contest sponsor by the security company Tipping Point is back.. A price of 10,000 will be given to anyone that can send a virus through e-mail or text message. The virus has to be able to turn on a malignus program that some of these devices carry: iPhone, BlackBerry, Android, Symbian and Windows Mobile phones.
Also, 5,000 will be given to those who can hack easily Microsoft, Apple and Linux systems.
The contest will be held during the CanSecWest Security Conference March 16-20th in Vancouver, BC.

I think this is a really cool way to test technology and to see if we can beat it.

Sources:

http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/02/25/pwn2own-2009

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/11/2141256&from=rss

Digital Woes

(*This is last week's blog. I accidentally posted it somewhere else...)

When I moved into my very first apartment, I was twenty-one years old and in college. I lived with four other guys my age. One of my roommates was pretty tech-savy and hooked up a “black box” to the internet. Every movie channel, every pay-per-view event, and lots of adult entertainment were at our disposal free as the air. Those were the days.

Now that cable is broadcast digitally, the old “black box” days are gone. When I graduated college and moved into another apartment, I was now working a full-time job and drinking slightly less beer. But I still didn’t want to pay for cable. So I called up my old roomate and asked him where he got his box. He gave me a website (http://www.24-7descramblers.com/). When I called the company, a man on the other end asked me what company I got my cable from. I said Comcast. This guy was nice enough to explain to me that a black box would do me no good; my cable was broadcast digitally. While I was fortunate enough to deal with an honest black box dealer, many like me who are technologically illiterate aren’t so lucky, as documented by MSNBC (http://www.digital-cable-filter-scam.com/index11.html). These people pray on others like myself who didn’t understand how digital cable works. Now that the signal is contantly communicating back and forth with the reciever, it is virtually impossible to steal it.

At least I can still steal my neighbor’s wireless internet signal.

OnDemand is in Demand

I’ve been an On-Demand junkie ever since the service was first introduced. That’s why I won’t switch from Comcast to any other provider. It’s not that the others don’t have the same kind of features. It’s that the actual quantity of content available with Comcast’s On-Demand can’t be beat. I could watch a movie (many great classics are free), a sitcom, a National Geographic documentary, a 5-minute Beavis and Butt-head cartoon, an episode of the Three Stooges, a workout video, a cooking lesson, a speech by President Obama…the choices are endlesss.

Now it looks like On Demand is going to be online at no additional charge to Comcast costumers. Sites like Hulu will probably see a shrinkage of users now that Comcast is entering the VOD market. According to Silicon Alley Insider:

“Cable companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable (TWC), etc., generate a huge chunk -- say, around half -- of the revenue for cable networks. TV ads generate about half, too. Meanwhile, online ads generate very little. That is why Food Network might hypothetically put ten seasons of "Good Eats" on Comcast's 'OnDemand Online' but not on Hulu.”

http://www.businessinsider.com/comcasts-ondemand-online-web-video-service-coming-this-year-2009-2

Comcast’s selection will probably be much better than the random selection of these other sites and will probably run much smoother. Now we’ll be able to watch OnDemand from work or on a plane…I know I’ll be reading fewer and fewer books.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/160014/comcast_ondemand_goes_online.html

Cable to start streaming?

This seems like the next step for the major networks. Television seems like it's moving towards the realm of all-access and fully controlled in terms of when-you-can-watch by the viewer. I have mixed feelings about this, because sometimes it's nice to have to schedule your life around your television watching, instead of scheduling your television watching around your life!


http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-cable-companies-streaming-tv-shows-online-bittersweet-for-consumers/

http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-msos-solution-to-online-video-make-it-exclusive-to-us/

If Cable Companies Start Streaming Shows, What Would It Mean For Consumers?
By Rory Maher - Mon 23 Feb 2009 10:24 AM PST
As we and others have reported, cable operators are exploring the idea of negotiating streaming rights into their carriage agreements with cable networks. If that becomes a reality, what would it mean for consumers? Giving cable companies another service to charge for can’t be good for viewers, right? Well, it’s not quite that simple. Here are the upsides:

—Consumers could finally get a universal set-top box that converts internet video into high-quality TV viewing. People who want to watch internet video on TV now are faced with few (not great) options: get a simple converter from the local Radio Shack that is clumsy and often offers pixelated viewing, use a media center PC, or rely on Boxee, a start-up that recently had Hulu content pulled from its service. If cable companies were to control much of the network content on the internet, they would probably stick a chip in their set-top boxes that would allow for a more user-friendly format for watching online video on a TV. And people could use it to watch not just Lost or Friday Night Lights, but everything from video news clips on MSN to user-generated content from YouTube. The cable companies could also add web-browsing features as well.

—There would be more programming available. Currently, the cable networks make only a subset of their shows available on Hulu—- typically, only the most recent four or five episodes of a given series—and for a limited window. If the cable companies and networks can find a way to make more money from online video, they’re more likely to offer entire seasons, or even entire libraries from previous seasons, like ABC.com now does. The caveat: You’d have to be a subscriber of the cable provider to get the extra content, and would likely have to pay an incrementally larger subscription fee.

DTV Transition? Sounds Like Government Conspiracy.

It seems that the DTV conversion has another obstacle to overcome other than simply being put into place. A new YouTube video shows a user breaking open his government issuesd DTV converter box and finding a camera and microphone on the inside. Although the user who posted the video has acknowledged that it is indeed a hoax and there is no camera inside his DTV box, many people don't find it humorous. Many conspiracy sites across the web have blown it wide open, claiming that this video may only be "a smokescreen" for the real government plan. For the most part, it is widely being received as the hoax as it is, but there seems to be some underlying fear in the eyes of a few DTV converter box customers.

For the most part, I don't see this as a big deal. It's a stupid viral video. I am just waiting for Magnavox to come and and make a statement. Can't you claim slander for this sort of thing? Anyway, you never know what people will or will not believe. There are still tons of people out there who have not made any progress in preparing for the DTV transition (and they probably won't), and I can some of those people potentially believing something like this hoax video.

Click here for the article and here for the YouTube video.

President Obama's State of the Union Address Interactive

Tonight, during President Obama State of the Union Address CNN and ABC will not only be competing for TV ratings but also for interactive users. CNN and Facebook joined forces to invite viewers to comment during the address. ABC did not want to stay behind, they joined forces with Twitter in order to have interactivity during the address. ABC's Nightline ancors will be transmitting as well as using Twitter to communicate with viewers tonight.

CNN and Facebook already had a succesful trial during the Inaguration, tomorrow we will now if people likes this kind of interactivity.

I can just tell you that Oriana, Scheherazade and I used facebook to comment during the Oscar's ceremony and I thought it was very fun to do so.

For more info go to: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=6941694 and to http://www.cnn.com/live/

Wikipedia Assignment

Here is the link to my Wikipedia assignment on CBS Innertube. I had a hard time finding new information about Innertube because CBS just rebranded it into CBS.com. I did rework what was there though and add the last two subheadings. I also inserted citations for five sources. Enjoy...

Music Video Bargain!

Fred Seibert, one of the pioneers of MTV, created a new network on the web devoted to music videos made in a day for $99 or less. In other words, a music video equivalent to a value meal. This is the theme of the lates "network" from web-production studio Next New Networks. 

Now signed and unsigned bands have the opportunity to create a video and have it distributed and promoted by Next New Network and its website 99dollarmusicvideos.com. 

This may sound like what thousands of bands are already doing, but the difference is, Next New Networks is giving the videos a marketing push to separate them from the clutter of Youtube and MySpace. 

Verizon FiOS  sponsors the series. 

Next New Network gets a 3 month exclusive window to distribute the video and then shares distribution rights with the band or the band's label (ultimately the owners of the video). 

Every week the company will produce one video in collaboration with a different band, as well as a "making of" video with behind the scenes action and Verizon brand integration.

I think that this is a very interesting concept. I know tons of bands looking for cost effective ways of getting their music made. If the quality of these videos and the marketing strategy work, Next New Network may be able to compensate their low price of production with an influx of customers. I'd be interested in learning more about their business plan. I'm sure the Verizon brand integration is covering a lot of their costs. I think this will only work if the idea takes off quickly....otherwise they'll be in the poor house and fast....

Then again, if this does take off, what will become of traditional music production houses? Will this lead to an overall drop in music production costs? 

SAG Directors Reject "Last, Best, Final Offer"

Actors and producers who are working to reach a new contract to cover provisions for payment of work appearing online and through other platforms hit a snag Saturday. The Screen Actors Guild voted 73% to 27% to reject the offer for a new contract with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers. AMPTP switched the terms of the agreement from two to three years at the last minute causing the deal to fall apart. AMPTP called the deal "strong and fair." But SAG members expressed concern that changing the expiration date of its contract would weaken its bargaining position in the future. The main points SAG members were arguing for were the amount of pay for programming shown over the Internet and DVD sales.

For more information check out:

MSNBC
NYTIMES

New Mobile Technology Set In Motion, Would customers be interested?

Cellphone Companies have been debating for a while what its going to replace the 3G Networks that exist nowadays. Companies like AT&T, Verizon and Sprint are trying to come up with strategies to increase consumer demand now that many people have cutting edge cell phone devices.

3G Networks run as fast as DSL Lines. This works ok when you want to do tasks like transferring modest data files, talking, texting and even watching video. However, phone companies are already working on the next generation of technology which will be approximately ten times faster than the one today.

The race has already begun, and the Company that seems to be getting ahead is Sprint because of its alliance with Intel, Clearwire and other companies to build an ultrafast Wimax Network. Verizon is developing other system call Long Term Evolution.

However, is this really necessary?? Sometimes the introduction of new technologies can have an adverse effect on the consumers. Generally, companies create new technologies that force consumers to change their devices for new products they don't really understand. One example of this was the battle between HD DVD and Blu-ray. The introduction of these technologies caused a lot of confusion among costumers, billions of dollars were spent and for what? To win a market that didn't really exist or that is not the size that Companies thought it would be.

The next generation of cellular service might be jugded more than how if fuctions. However, if people think that its not worth upgrading their current service and get new subscription plans, none of this would matter.

This has to be taken into account during this weak economy period where people are beginning to use more prepaid phones in order to cut costs. Last year, prepaid phones sales grew 13%, 3 times faster than traditional cell phone plans. mostly because people want to avoid contracts and billing surprises that come with traditional cell phone plans. Cell phone companies hope that with the introduction of this techonology, their revenue stream would increase. However saving 15 to 20 a month is a big deal these days, so its very uncertain if people would be willing to adquire new devices and upgrade their monthly plans in order to get 4G and its benefits, which would be an additional cost.

Personally, I think that eventhough having a faster Networks sounds pretty cool, in this time of recession, it seems that investing more money in new devices and new services is something that people would very unlikely do.

Here are the links to the articles:

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1880538,00.html


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/21/technology/21prepaid.html?ref=technology

Comcast and Time Warner: We want to be HULU

With the huge success of online TV, cable companies like Comcast and Time Warner are shifting their business to deliver their content via the three screens. They saw the potential of HULU and now they want a part of it. This new business structure could help cable companies to become kings of the online and mobile TV industry.
As I love to see my favorite shows any time I want, what about new content? The Three screens are showing the same but nothing new is on the table. Where can we find a great series only made for mobile devices? Where’s the hit program born as an online show?

Sources:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123509028580728229.html

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/dont-count-out-comcasts-online-vod/?scp=1&sq=Don%E2%80%99t%20Count%20Out%20Cable%20Online&st=cse

Real Time Crime

The three screens are not only for entertainment, education or news purposes. Their convergence is also helping to create the world's newest Justice League: the one were either of us gets to be Superman, Wonderwoman or that Apache Chief that could grow to any size he wanted.

Last year, New York City's 911 service started a new platform capable of receiving user text messages reporting crimes. They're now working on receiving user videos that can help them solve crimes faster.

A recent article in the NYT tells a similar story in Chicago, were street cameras have just being linked to the city's 911 network, helping them locate a suspect or crime scene withing seconds after a call, and even before officials get to the scene. Private companies and institutions are also allowing Chicago-911 hookups to their surveillance systems.

Of course, this generates a lot of privacy issues and concerns, which are being addressed bit by bit. The point is that the convergence of all this technologies can in fact help create safer cities (or at least cities were people afraid of "Big Brother" will just think twice before committing a crime).

Will it work, though?
Ask the woman who, last September, snapped a shot of the guy who had taken a picture of her underskirt in the NYC Subway. She took his picture using her cellphone, told him "smile because I am going to the police," and then email the shot to the authorities.
The guy was effectively arrested.

Forget citizen journalism, this is Citizen Justice League!
(Both courtesy of three screens)

S. Quiroga

Source 1: Chicago Links Street Cameras to Its 911 Network (NYT)
Source 2: 911 to Accept Cellphone Videos (NYT)
Source 3: Sex harass victim fights back with cell phone pic (MSNBC)
Source 4: Learn about the "Apache Chief" (courtesy of Wikipedia)

Mobile Phones as Doctors

The biggest news to come out of the Mobile World Congress held in Barcelona, Spain last week was the news about the use of mobile phones in the medical realm. According to the New York Times, British mobile phone operator Vodaphone along with the United Nations and the mHealth Alliance are backing the efforts to increase usage of mobile phones for patient-doctor communication. Terry Kramer, strategy director at Vodaphone pushed the concept by stating that "There are 2.2 billion mobile phones in the developing world, 305 million computers but only 11 million hospital beds," in address to the Congress. Kramer believes that mobile phones can be used to remind patients to get vaccinations, set-up appointments, relay information about outbreaks, or provide facts about a patient’s condition.

This type of cell phone education is already at work in Uganda where, according to the Tehran Times, the mobile provider Celtel sent text messages to 15,000 subscribers on their network asking a question about HIV/AIDS. Users who responded with an incorrect answer were sent a text with the correct answer. Finally, all participants were sent a text with information on how to get counseling and testing a local health clinic. After the survey, the number of people who sought counseling climbed from 1000 to over 1400 in less than 6 weeks.

Since 1998 in Mexico, mobile users have been able to call or text a hotline with a doctor answering the other end. This service only provides advice to its users.

My Thoughts

I think that this is a good, effective use of mobile phones but I also think that there is a lot of potential for mistakes. Texting a doctor is no substitute for an actual appointment where the patient gets to verbally voice their concerns and the doctor has the ability to perform a physical exam. I have been a certified EMT in Massachusetts for over 2 years and I have learned that visual cues to a patient’s condition are often more telling than the symptoms they are describing to you. As a provider, I think it would be very frustrating and almost a shot-in-the-dark to give medical advice through a text message.