Showing posts with label smartphones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label smartphones. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Dear Android Users: Google Is Tracking You Even If You Disable Location Services

Slowly but surely, Americans have been conditioned to give up any expectations of privacy in the name of public safety and/or for simple technological conveniences.  However, there remains, even today, a tiny sliver of the population that would prefer to not have their every movement tracked no matter how antiquated that makes them look. Be that as it may, per a recent discovery from Quartz, those old-school folks better hope they haven"t been using an Android device for the past 11 months.








Many people realize that smartphones track their locations. But what if you actively turn off location services, haven’t used any apps, and haven’t even inserted a carrier SIM card?


 


Even if you take all of those precautions, phones running Android software gather data about your location and send it back to Google when they’re connected to the internet, a Quartz investigation has revealed.


 


Since the beginning of 2017, Android phones have been collecting the addresses of nearby cellular towers—even when location services are disabled—and sending that data back to Google. The result is that Google, the unit of Alphabet behind Android, has access to data about individuals’ locations and their movements that go far beyond a reasonable consumer expectation of privacy.


 


Quartz observed the data collection occur and contacted Google, which confirmed the practice.




Of course, the company that has been collecting your location data for nearly a year now without your knowledge, would like for you to know that you shouldn"t worry too much about your privacy because they can assure you the data was never "used or stored" and was only collected to help "improve the speed and performance of message delivery"....








The cell tower addresses have been included in information sent to the system Google uses to manage push notifications and messages on Android phones for the past 11 months, according to a Google spokesperson. They were never used or stored, the spokesperson said, and the company is now taking steps to end the practice after being contacted by Quartz. By the end of November, the company said, Android phones will no longer send cell-tower location data to Google, at least as part of this particular service, which consumers cannot disable.


 


“In January of this year, we began looking into using Cell ID codes as an additional signal to further improve the speed and performance of message delivery,” the Google spokesperson said in an email. “However, we never incorporated Cell ID into our network sync system, so that data was immediately discarded, and we updated it to no longer request Cell ID.”



Google


...you know, because wireless carriers haven"t quite figured out yet how to efficiently route data streams through network nodes just yet...








It is not clear how cell-tower addresses, transmitted as a data string that identifies a specific cell tower, could have been used to improve message delivery. But the privacy implications of the covert location-sharing practice are plain. While information about a single cell tower can only offer an approximation of where a mobile device actually is, multiple towers can be used to triangulate its location to within about a quarter-mile radius, or to a more exact pinpoint in urban areas, where cell towers are closer together.


 


The practice is troubling for people who’d prefer they weren’t tracked, especially for those such as law-enforcement officials or victims of domestic abuse who turn off location services thinking they’re fully concealing their whereabouts. Although the data sent to Google is encrypted, it could potentially be sent to a third party if the phone had been compromised with spyware or other methods of hacking. Each phone has a unique ID number, with which the location data can be associated.


 


“It has pretty concerning implications,” said Bill Budington, a software engineer who works for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that advocates for digital privacy. “You can kind of envision any number of circumstances where that could be extremely sensitive information that puts a person at risk.”


 


"It is really a mystery as to why this is not optional,” said Matthew Hickey, a security expert and researcher at Hacker House, a security firm based in London. “It seems quite intrusive for Google to be collecting such information that is only relevant to carrier networks when there are no SIM card or enabled services.”



Of course, if their excuse for this gross invasion of privacy is even remotely true, then we look forward Google"s follow-up report to Android users detailing precisely how much faster their text messages are now than before...we won"t hold our breath.









Sunday, November 5, 2017

Will "RussiaGate" Result In Social Media Regulation?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,


Whether preplanned or inadvertent, one of the most likely and far-reaching consequences of the fake news RussiaGate scandal is that Facebook and other social media giants might soon come under strict regulation by the state.



The artificially contrived and “deep state”-driven RussiaGate scandal has been inflated to epic proportions and has already resulted in the unexpected suicide of the US’ soft power, but this never-ending conspiracy theory is now poised to affect the rest of the world in a completely different way due to the likely “regulation” that Washington might soon impose on social media giants like Facebook. “Traditional” media has long been clamoring for the American government to do something about the astronomical rise of social media, which has poached millions upon millions of people away from newspapers and TV stations and redirected them to their smartphones instead. From the perspective of social media and many of its users, however, these people weren’t “poached”, but liberated from their prior status as a captive audience to conventional influence techniques and allowed to roam freely in cyberspace as they searched for alternative non-mainstream interpretations of current and past events.


The rise of social media coincided with that of Russia’s publicly funded RT and Sputnik media outlets, whose reporting and analyses soon went viral all over the internet because they satisfied the crucial information desire that so many people were craving for years. Their explosive popularity led to them gaining a sizeable following among Western audiences, who voluntarily shared their content online and contributed to what Facebook describes as “organic growth”, or the natural trending of non-advertised posts. While posing a challenge to Establishment narratives all across the world, neither RT nor Sputnik were seriously viewed as  “threat” by the US and its allies because they had yet to be blamed for affecting any real-life change outside of the internet “matrix” of clicks, likes, and shares.


That all changed during the 2016 US election, however, since the Mainstream Media’s monopoly on information was wielded in such a blatantly and obviously biased nature against Trump that countless Americans began countenancing what would have previously been unthinkable to many of them just a year prior, and that’s trawling foreign-based media outlets in order to get a more accurate sense of the truth that their own country’s media barons were suppressing. This certainly says a lot about the deep distrust that was already prevalent among many Americans towards their own government, but it hit its climax the more that the Mainstream Media began concocting openly fraudulent “news” stories about Trump in a bid to derail his candidacy, with this effort becoming unquestionably clear when compared with the flowery coverage given to anything that Clinton said or did. As is now known, Americans rebelled against the Establishment by voting Trump into office, and the “deep state” was left scratching its head about how this could happen.


The author explained the domestic dynamics at play in his November 2016 article right after the election titled “Dear Foreign Friends, Here’s Why Trump Won (From A Clevelander)”, but the general idea is that the Democrats’ weaponization of identity politics miserably backfired as Americans sought out a radical solution to bring balance to their “deep state”-destabilized country. Nevertheless, the Establishment couldn’t bring itself to recognize the obvious, take the loss, and move on to fight another battle later on, hence why they decided to continue pressing the cringe-inducingly ridiculous narrative that “Russian trolls” somehow swayed the election due to their social media activity, and hinting that there might even be a whiff of outright collusion between Presidents Trump and Putin in organizing this movie-like conspiracy.


This narrative is convenient for many geopolitical reasons that are outside the scope of this analysis, but the domestic benefit that was expected to be derived from this storyline is that “traditional” media and the Establishment finally had the pretext that they were looking for to “regulate” social media. Bringing Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and others into compliance with already existing American laws about revealing the source of election-related advertisements is one thing, but pressing these platforms to restrict the activity of Russian publicly financed media outlets like RT and Sputnik, as well as speculatively “shadow banning” some of their staff and supporters, is a bridge too far into dystopia, as is doing so on the US governments’ double-standard FARA witch hunt which alleges that the two are “foreign agents”. As a result, it appears as though the “good ‘ole days” of “freewheeling” across Facebook and sharing whatever content one finds enjoyable is soon coming to an end as Washington begins to “regulate” social media on the basis of “safeguarding democracy”.


Of course, the real reason is that some vested power interests also have a stake in supporting their decades-long allies in the “traditional” media against their new social media rivals, to say nothing of the self-evident imperative in suppressing non-mainstream news and analyses through the US’ War on Russian Media. The forthcoming “regulation” might even go further than what’s presently being observed, as there’s a chance that Washington could seek to label social media platform like Facebook as being “media companies” in their own right, which would then instantly force them to comply with the existing legislation that their “traditional” media counterparts have had to contend with for years. In a sense, this would “level the playing field” between “traditional” and social media, but it could also destroy the very essence of social media itself. Not only that, but if the US comes to consider Facebook and Google as “monopolies”, then they could be broken up and “regulated” even further.


What’s terribly ironic about all of this is that the US government’s international stance has always been in favor of “internet freedoms”, routinely attacking Russia, China, and Iran for implementing national security-based legislation aimed at thwarting the risk that Color Revolutions and Hybrid Wars could dangerously recruit across social media, but now all of a sudden “the land of the free” is doing the same thing as the countries that it regularly smears as “dictatorships”, though without any convincing reason and depending solely on a trumped-up fake news conspiracy theory. As is typical, the ruling Establishment and their “deep state” supporters condescendingly believe that their true intentions are invisible to the naked eye because of their presumption that the populace is stupid and politically unaware, though the very fact that their “perfect candidate” was defeated by a “dark horse” like Trump totally disproves this notion.


The reality is that most Americans, and the rest of the world at large, see the US government’s “regulation” of social media for what it actually is, and that’s a dictatorial power grab which crushes any remaining doubt that “the land of the free” is anything but, and that the “freedom of speech” is only allowed if one is either supporting the Establishment or behaving as its “controlled opposition”. The number one thing that “American Democracy” can’t accept is the free flow of information and interpretations that challenge the prevailing state-supported narrative, which in and of itself negates the very basis of what the world always thought that “American Democracy” was supposed to be about, and this powerful revelation proves that the US government’s accusations that its geopolitical rivals are “authoritarian” was never anything more than a psychological projection of its own self.









Saturday, November 4, 2017

Lampposts are Covered in Airbags to Stop ‘Smartphone Zombies’ Bumping Into them

Lampposts are Covered in Airbags to Stop


  • Authorities in Austrian city say phone users are increasingly walking into objects

  • Tourists accused of not looking where they are going while looking at devices

  • Civic chiefs putting airbags around lampposts to protect ‘smartphone zombies’




(Austria) Lampposts are being covered in airbags to stop so-called ‘smartphone zombies’ bumping into them as they walk around staring at their screens in an Austrian city.


Salzburg authorities say tourists are increasingly hurting themselves by not looking where they are going while checking their devices.


Locals have described mobile phone users as Smombies, the short form for a ‘smartphone zombie’, and civic chiefs are taking action to stop them getting injured.














Salzburg authorities say tourists are increasingly hurting themselves by not looking where they are going and accidentally walking into objects



They believe that putting airbags on lampposts is a way of highlighting the need for people to be more careful when using their devices.


The action follows a warning from a local board which promotes safety in public and private life known as the Board for Traffic Safety (KFV).




READ FULL ARTICLE AT DAILY MAIL.

The post Lampposts are Covered in Airbags to Stop ‘Smartphone Zombies’ Bumping Into them appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

Amazon Is Asking Customers To Hand Over Their House Keys

Would you feel comfortable giving Jeff Bezos your house keys? Amazon is hoping that the answer is yes.


The e-commerce behemoth and creator of a global deflation impulse on Wednesday introduced a connected door-lock and security-camera system to let package carriers, guests and dog walkers into your home using an app, WSJ reports. The so-called “Amazon Key” will be available for the bargain price of $25. “This is not an experiment for us,” said Peter Larsen, vice president of delivery technology at Amazon. “We think this is going to be a fundamental way that customers shop with us for years to come."



Of course, one Amazon executive insisted that the key isn’t an experiment: the e-commerce monopolist fully expects this entry process will soon be common features of the homes of Prime customers, giving Amazon direct access to millions of homes. And that’s no accident: The key is essentially Amazon’s coup de grace in its battle to master “the last mile” of delivering packages - a phrase denoting the last leg of a package’s journey as it’s processed, placed on a delivery truck, and spirited to the customer’s door.


As we reported last week, Amazon recently struck a deal with some of the largest landlords in the country to install electronic lockers that delivery people will be able to access for the purposes of dropping off packages. The lockers have a dual purpose: They will help landlords reduce the building staff’s workload (and wages) while also cutting down dramatically on the rate of lost or stolen packages, an area that Amazon has identified as a potentially significant source of cost savings. And, as WSJ points out, in-home delivery is the “next logical step."



As it tinkers with drone delivery and its own delivery service to rival UPS and FedEx, Amazon continues to seek out every competitive advantage it can find as it tries to scale up to take on two entrenched competitors who’ve been pioneers in supply chain logistics. Given the prevalence of smartphones, cutting down on theft appears relatively straightforward.


A consequence of the rise in e-commerce is that “theft is certainly a problem,” said John Haber, who works with retailers on supply-chain issues as chief executive of consultancy Spend Management Experts. Theft is particularly pronounced during the holiday season, when some thieves dubbed “porch pirates” go from door to door stealing gifts.


 


But it remains to be seen whether consumers are ready to open their doors to strangers. Transportation industry experts said that most people are likely to balk at the idea, at least at first.



There is always a risk that customers just might balk at letting complete strangers into their home.


“People have a difficult time letting cleaning people into their house if they haven’t been properly vetted,” said Ivan Hofmann, a former FedEx Corp. executive and transportation-industry consultant. Still, he added, that is how innovation works: “You have to try things that no one else has tried and see what works.”



In the beginning, the Amazon Key system will allow in-home deliveries only from Amazon Logistics, the company’s delivery network. When an Amazon delivery-service provider brings a package to the door, he or she scans the label with a phone before requesting entry to the home.


The system unlocks the door automatically - without a code - and turns on the security camera as the delivery person opens the door and sets the package down inside. After leaving, the delivery person taps the phone again to relock the door.


 


The package recipient gets notifications throughout, including a time-stamped log and the possibility to watch a live video of the delivery or a recording afterward. The recipient can also block the ability to enter the home throughout the process.



Customers can also use the app to generate codes for guests to enter and will eventually add access for service providers like dog walkers and maids.



The Amazon Key package includes the new Amazon Cloud Cam security camera and a smart-lock made by partner companies. For now, it is only available to Prime members, something the company said helps add value to the $99 annual subscription fee. The service will initially be available in 37 cities starting Nov. 8.



Customers who’ve purchased Amazon’s Alexa personal assistant or Echo speakers should already be comfortable with installing the company’s devices in their homes, WSJ says. But by introducing Key, Amazon risks angering certain business partners, like smart-doorbell maker Ring and smart-door lock maker August Home Inc., which Swedish lock maker Assa Abloy AB signed an agreement to acquire last week.



However,  if Amazon’s track record is any indication, the company’s limitless tolerance to burn money on any growth idea lends it a crucial competitive advantage that could quickly see Amazon Key become a staple in all American homes, meaning that it’s only a matter of time before this tweet becomes reality.


 



 









Wednesday, October 18, 2017

"No Devilishly Effective Plot" - Clinton Chief Strategist Admits "You Can't Buy The Presidency For $100,000"

Authored by Mark Penn, former chief strategist on Bill Clinton’s 1996 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign, and Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign; via The Wall Street Journal,


Russia didn’t win Trump the White House any more than China re-elected Bill Clinton in 1996.



The fake news about fake news is practically endless. Americans worried about Russia’s influence in the 2016 election have seized on a handful of Facebook ads—as though there weren’t also three 90-minute debates, two televised party conventions, and $2.4 billion spent on last year’s campaign. The danger is that bending facts to fit the Russia story line may nudge Washington into needlessly and recklessly regulating the internet and curtailing basic freedoms.


After an extensive review, Facebook has identified $100,000 of ads that came from accounts associated with Russia. Assume for the sake of argument that Vladimir Putin personally authorized this expenditure. Given its divisive nature, the campaign could be dubbed “From Russia, With Hate”—except it would make for a disappointing James Bond movie.


Analyzing the pattern of expenditures, and doing some back-of-the-envelope math, it’s clear this was no devilishly effective plot. Facebook says 56% of the ads ran after the election, reducing the tally that could have influenced the result to about $44,000. It also turns out the ads were not confined to swing states but also shown in places like New York, California and Texas. Supposing half the ads went to swing states brings the total down to $22,000.


Facebook also counted ads as early as June 2015. Assuming they were evenly spread and we want only those that ran the year of the election, that knocks it down to $13,000. Most of the ads did not solicit support for a candidate and carried messages on issues like racism, immigration and guns. The actual electioneering then amounts to about $6,500.


Now look at the bigger picture.


Every day, Americans see hundreds of ads on TV and radio, in newspapers and magazines, on billboards and smartphones. North Americans post to Facebook something like a billion times a day, and during the election many of those messages were about politics. Facebook typically runs about $40 million worth of advertising a day in North America.


Then consider the scale of American presidential elections.


Hillary Clinton’s total campaign budget, including associated committees, was $1.4 billion. Mr. Trump and his allies had about $1 billion. Even a full $100,000 of Russian ads would have erased just 0.025% of Hillary’s financial advantage. In the last week of the campaign alone, Mrs. Clinton’s super PAC dumped $6 million in ads into Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.


I have 40 years of experience in politics, and this Russian ad buy, mostly after the election anyway, simply does not add up to a carefully targeted campaign to move voters. It takes tens of millions of dollars to deliver meaningful messages to the contested portion of the electorate. Converting someone who voted for the other party last time is an enormously difficult task. Swing voters in states like Ohio or Florida are typically barraged with 50% or more of a campaign’s budget. Try watching TV in those states the week before an election and you will see how jammed the airwaves are.


No one wants foreign governments meddling in American elections.


In 1996, the Chinese government had the “China plan” and pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign. There were congressional investigations, and several fundraisers were prosecuted, but Attorney General Janet Reno rejected calls for an independent counsel. Campaigns tightened up their donor-validation procedures, and life moved on. The same is called for here. Internet companies should improve their screening of electioneering ads, impose clearer standards on all ads, and do a better job weeding out phony accounts.


Millions of taxpayer dollars have probably been spent already poring over that $100,000 of Facebook ads.


Better to keep it all in perspective, as everyone did in 1996.


The only way Russia will get its money’s worth is if Washington overreacts and narrows the very freedoms that make America different in the first place.

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

And The Nation That 'Cannot Live Without The Internet' The Most Is...

Have you ever thought about what life would be like without the internet?


Given the volume of time people spend immersed in their smartphones, iPads and laptops, an unconnected life is pretty hard to imagine these days. For the majority of millennials, the time before the world wide web is now nothing more than a distant memory, a memory that"s been eviscerated by the ubiquity and life-changing impact of connected technology.


Interestingly, Statista"s Niall McCarthy notes that it isn"t just millennials who are losing touch with a world without smartphones, emails and social media. Research from Ipsos has found that society in general just can"t live without the internet.


Infographic: Where People Can


You will find more statistics at Statista


18,180 people were surveyed across 23 countries, with more than two thirds of them saying they cannot imagine a life that isn’t prefixed by www dot.


While 73 percent of Americans said they cannot imagine an unnconnected life, the highest share was recorded in India at 82 percent.

Monday, August 7, 2017

More Lonely, Fewer 'Friends', Less Sex - Have Smartphones Destroyed A Generation?

More comfortable online than out partying, post-Millennials are safer, physically, than adolescents have ever been. But they’re on the brink of a mental-health crisis...



The Atlantic"s Jean Twenge asks the most crucial question of our age... "have smartphones destroyed a generation?"


...Unlike the teens of my generation, who might have spent an evening tying up the family landline with gossip, [teens today] talk on Snapchat, the smartphone app that allows users to send pictures and videos that quickly disappear. They make sure to keep up their Snapstreaks, which show how many days in a row they have Snapchatted with each other. Sometimes they save screenshots of particularly ridiculous pictures of friends. “It’s good blackmail,” Athena said. (Because she’s a minor, I’m not using her real name.) She told me she’d spent most of the summer hanging out alone in her room with her phone. That’s just the way her generation is, she said. “We didn’t have a choice to know any life without iPads or iPhones. I think we like our phones more than we like actual people.”


I’ve been researching generational differences for 25 years, starting when I was a 22-year-old doctoral student in psychology. Typically, the characteristics that come to define a generation appear gradually, and along a continuum. Beliefs and behaviors that were already rising simply continue to do so. Millennials, for instance, are a highly individualistic generation, but individualism had been increasing since the Baby Boomers turned on, tuned in, and dropped out. I had grown accustomed to line graphs of trends that looked like modest hills and valleys. Then I began studying Athena’s generation.


Around 2012, I noticed abrupt shifts in teen behaviors and emotional states. The gentle slopes of the line graphs became steep mountains and sheer cliffs, and many of the distinctive characteristics of the Millennial generation began to disappear. In all my analyses of generational data - some reaching back to the 1930s - I had never seen anything like it.


...


What happened in 2012 to cause such dramatic shifts in behavior? It was after the Great Recession, which officially lasted from 2007 to 2009 and had a starker effect on Millennials trying to find a place in a sputtering economy. But it was exactly the moment when the proportion of Americans who owned a smartphone surpassed 50 percent.


The more I pored over yearly surveys of teen attitudes and behaviors, and the more I talked with young people like Athena, the clearer it became that theirs is a generation shaped by the smartphone and by the concomitant rise of social media. I call them iGen. Born between 1995 and 2012, members of this generation are growing up with smartphones, have an Instagram account before they start high school, and do not remember a time before the internet.


...


More comfortable in their bedrooms than in a car or at a party, today’s teens are physically safer than teens have ever been. They’re markedly less likely to get into a car accident and, having less of a taste for alcohol than their predecessors, are less susceptible to drinking’s attendant ills.


Psychologically, however, they are more vulnerable than Millennials were: Rates of teen depression and suicide have skyrocketed since 2011. It’s not an exaggeration to describe iGen as being on the brink of the worst mental-health crisis in decades. Much of this deterioration can be traced to their phones.


...


There is compelling evidence that the devices we’ve placed in young people’s hands are having profound effects on their lives - and making them seriously unhappy.


...


You might expect that teens spend so much time in these new spaces because it makes them happy, but most data suggest that it does not. The Monitoring the Future survey, funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and designed to be nationally representative, has asked 12th-graders more than 1,000 questions every year since 1975 and queried eighth- and 10th-graders since 1991. The survey asks teens how happy they are and also how much of their leisure time they spend on various activities, including nonscreen activities such as in-person social interaction and exercise, and, in recent years, screen activities such as using social media, texting, and browsing the web. The results could not be clearer: Teens who spend more time than average on screen activities are more likely to be unhappy, and those who spend more time than average on nonscreen activities are more likely to be happy.


There’s not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness. Eighth-graders who spend 10 or more hours a week on social media are 56 percent more likely to say they’re unhappy than those who devote less time to social media.



The allure of independence, so powerful to previous generations, holds less sway over today’s teens, who are less likely to leave the house without their parents. The shift is stunning: 12th-graders in 2015 were going out less often than eighth-graders did as recently as 2009.


Today’s teens are also less likely to date. The initial stage of courtship, which Gen Xers called “liking” (as in “Ooh, he likes you!”), kids now call “talking”—an ironic choice for a generation that prefers texting to actual conversation. After two teens have “talked” for a while, they might start dating. But only about 56 percent of high-school seniors in 2015 went out on dates; for Boomers and Gen Xers, the number was about 85 percent.


The decline in dating tracks with a decline in sexual activity. The drop is the sharpest for ninth-graders, among whom the number of sexually active teens has been cut by almost 40 percent since 1991.


Even driving, a symbol of adolescent freedom inscribed in American popular culture, has lost its appeal for today’s teens. Nearly all Boomer high-school students had their driver’s license by the spring of their senior year; more than one in four teens today still lack one at the end of high school. For some, Mom and Dad are such good chauffeurs that there’s no urgent need to drive. “My parents drove me everywhere and never complained, so I always had rides,” a 21-year-old student in San Diego told me. “I didn’t get my license until my mom told me I had to because she could not keep driving me to school.”


The number of eighth-graders who work for pay has been cut in half. These declines accelerated during the Great Recession, but teen employment has not bounced back, even though job availability has.


At the generational level, when teens spend more time on smartphones and less time on in-person social interactions, loneliness is more common.


So is depression. Once again, the effect of screen activities is unmistakable: The more time teens spend looking at screens, the more likely they are to report symptoms of depression.


Teens who spend three hours a day or more on electronic devices are 35 percent more likely to have a risk factor for suicide, such as making a suicide plan. Since 2007, the homicide rate among teens has declined, but the suicide rate has increased. In 2011, for the first time in 24 years, the teen suicide rate was higher than the teen homicide rate.


This trend has been especially steep among girls. Forty-eight percent more girls said they often felt left out in 2015 than in 2010, compared with 27 percent more boys. Girls use social media more often, giving them additional opportunities to feel excluded and lonely when they see their friends or classmates getting together without them. Social media levy a psychic tax on the teen doing the posting as well, as she anxiously awaits the affirmation of comments and likes.



The correlations between depression and smartphone use are strong enough to suggest that more parents should be telling their kids to put down their phone. As the technology writer Nick Bilton has reported, it’s a policy some Silicon Valley executives follow. Even Steve Jobs limited his kids’ use of the devices he brought into the world.


...


If you were going to give advice for a happy adolescence based on this survey, it would be straightforward: Put down the phone, turn off the laptop, and do something—anything—that does not involve a screen. Of course, these analyses don’t unequivocally prove that screen time causes unhappiness; it’s possible that unhappy teens spend more time online. But recent research suggests that screen time, in particular social-media use, does indeed cause unhappiness. One study asked college students with a Facebook page to complete short surveys on their phone over the course of two weeks. They’d get a text message with a link five times a day, and report on their mood and how much they’d used Facebook. The more they’d used Facebook, the unhappier they felt, but feeling unhappy did not subsequently lead to more Facebook use.


I realize that restricting technology might be an unrealistic demand to impose on a generation of kids so accustomed to being wired at all times. Prying the phone out of our kids’ hands will be difficult, even more so than the quixotic efforts of my parents’ generation to get their kids to turn off MTV and get some fresh air. But more seems to be at stake in urging teens to use their phone responsibly, and there are benefits to be gained even if all we instill in our children is the importance of moderation. Significant effects on both mental health and sleep time appear after two or more hours a day on electronic devices. The average teen spends about two and a half hours a day on electronic devices. Some mild boundary-setting could keep kids from falling into harmful habits.


Read the full report here...

Sunday, July 23, 2017

"You Afraid Of A Dead Body?" Boys Who Laughed While Man Drowned Will Face Charges

In a news story that sounds like something from Mad Max, a group of Florida teenagers who filmed themselves laughing and cracking jokes while a disabled man drowned, and then left the scene without telling anybody, will face criminal charges after all – but there’s a catch.


The teenagers, each between the ages of 14 and 16, will be charged with not reporting a death, a misdemeanor offense under Florida law. Authorities initially said there didn’t appear to be grounds to prosecute the teens, who were caught on camera mocking 32-year-old Jamel Dunn as he drowned in Cocoa, Florida, according to the New York Post.


The callous crime, which is vaguely reminiscent of the infamous Kitty Genovese slaying in New York City, is indicative of a trend tht has been bothering older Americans since the first signs began emerging in the early 90s. The contemporary breakdown in communal responsibility, fostered by smartphones and digitization of daily life, where violent videos inure children to death and violence. The boys can be heard in the video discussing Dunn’s impending death. One of the boys teased another about being scared to see a dead body, the boy replies “I ain’t scared to see no dead person.”



The disturbing footage, recorded by one of the boys, shows Dunn, who is disabled, struggling and screaming for help in the pondIn response, the boys urge him to get out of the water – “Get out the water you’re going to die!”  Another boy shouts. “We’re not finna help you!”


The recommended charges will be given to the Florida State Attorney’s Office, which will determine whether to prosecute the teens, according to Cocoa Police Chief Mike Cantaloupe.


Even if the boys are charged, misdemeanors typically carry sentences of less than a year, leaving the boys free of criminal records, unless they commit more crimes as adults Cocoa Police Department spokesperson Yvonne Martinez said the teens, ages 14 to 16, had The department didn’t disclose the number of teens involved, or their names.





“He started to struggle and scream for help and they just laughed,” Martinez said. “They didn’t call the police. They just laughed the whole time. He was just screaming … for someone to help him.” The teenagers didn’t stop joking about Dunn when he failed to surface in the water.






“Oh, he just died,” said one as the others laughed.



The teens left the Cocoa park without notifying anyone about Dunn’s death. Three days later, his body was discovered in the pond.


We are deeply saddened and shocked at both the manner in which Mr. Dunn lost his life and the actions of the witnesses to this tragedy,” State Attorney Phil Archer said in a statememt, according to NBC News.


Dunn’s sister Simone McIntosh started a GoFundMe campaign to raise money for his funeral and to help his two daughters.t Dunn’s death. Three days later, his body was discovered in the pond.

Thursday, June 1, 2017

Sorry Siri - You're The Dumbest "Smart" Assistant Out There

Many industry experts predict that our interactions with computing devices will move away from text-based input towards voice-based input in the future. Smartphones, voice-enabled speakers and other devices already come with so-called smart assistants such as Siri, Cortana or Google Assistant. As Statista"s Felix Richter notes, these virtual assistants can help you organize your day, control smart home devices and answer general questions. Or can they?


According to research conducted by digital agency Stone Temple "smart assistants" may not be quite as smart as they are made out to be.


Infographic: How Smart Are


You will find more statistics at Statista


Take Amazon"s Alexa for example: the assistant powering the company’s popular line of voice-enabled speakers was able to answer just 20.7 percent of the 5,000 questions fired at it as part of the experiment. Notably, Google Assistant and Microsoft"s Cortana were much more knowledgeable when it came to these factual questions while Apple"s Siri performed similar to Alexa... but as the chart above shows, Siri was the worst-performer in terms of 100% correct responses.

Friday, May 26, 2017

Smartphone Addiction Tightens Its Global Grip

How long is it since you last used your phone? Chances are, you"re using it right now to view this post. Analysts from Statista"s Digital Market Outlook have revealed that the amount of time we"re spending with our smartphones online has increased substantially over the last few years.


Infographic: Smartphone Addiction Tightens Its Global Grip | Statista


You will find more statistics at Statista


The term "smartphone addiction" is by now pretty well-established (you can take a test here to see if you might be a sufferer). As our infographic shows, across the world, this addiction seems to be tightening its grip. Of the countries surveyed, smartphone owners in Brazil spend by far the most amount of time online. The average user in 2016 spent close to 5 hours per day surfing - more than twice as long as in 2012.


Perhaps this explains the collapse of global worker productivity, as we detailed previously, adjusting for the WWII anomaly (which tells us that GDP is not a good measure of a country’s prosperity) US productivity growth peaked in 1972 – incidentally the year after Nixon took the US off gold.



The productivity decline witnessed ever since is unprecedented. Despite the short lived boom of the 1990s US productivity growth only average 1.2 per cent from 1975 up to today. If we isolate the last 15 years US productivity growth is on par with what an agrarian slave economy was able to achieve 200 years ago.


The Answer to the economic dilemma of our time is simple then - "Put The Smartphone Down"... but then again, what will happen to Amazon, Google, Netflix, Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and all the "real" economy drivers behind the stock market illusion?

Friday, May 5, 2017

Could Staring at a Screen Ignite Speech Delays in Toddlers?

Smartphones and tablets are a good way to keep young children quiet and entertained, but a recent study suggests that babies and toddlers allowed too much screen time may go on to develop speech delays.


Study principal investigator Dr. Catherine Birken, a staff pediatrician and scientist at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, says:


“Handheld devices are everywhere these days. While new pediatric guidelines suggest limiting screen time for babies and toddlers, we believe that the use of smartphones and tablets with young children has become quite common. This is the first study to report an association between handheld screen time and increased risk of expressive language delay.” [1]





The American Academy of Family Physicians explains expressive language as the ability to convey feelings and information. The AAP discourages any type of screen media in children younger than 18 months.


However, the American Academy of Pediatrics moved away last year from recommending a total ban on screen time in children 18-24 months. Instead, the group says that parents of children in this age group should choose high-quality programming and view it with their children to make sure they understand what they are seeing. [2]


One thing is clear: Unsupervised, unlimited screen time is not good for developing brains.


More Screen Time = More Risk


The study involved nearly 900 children from Toronto between the ages of 6 months and 2 years. At their 18-month checkup, 20% of the children of the youngsters were already spending an average of 28 minutes per day using handheld electronic gadgets, such as tablets, smartphones, and electronic games. [1]


The team used an infant toddler checklist, a validated screening tool, to assess the children’s language development at 18 months. They wanted to find out whether the child used sounds or words get attention or help, if they were able to put words together, and how many words each child used. [2]


The researchers found that the more time a child spent using handheld devices, the more likely that child was to have delays in expressive speech. To be specific, every 30 minutes of screen time was associated with a 49% increased risk of expressive speech delay.



The study did not find any link between the use of a handheld device and other areas of communication, such as gestures, body language, and social interaction. [2]


The study also did not prove a direct cause-and-effect link between handheld devices and speech delays. The team concluded that more research is needed to better understand the connection. [1]


Michael Robb, research director for Common Sense Media, says:


“This is an important study in highlighting some of the potential risks associated with media use, and specifically handheld mobile devices. What’s driving the effect is very important. The negative effects may be due to screen time replacing parent-child interaction (playing, reading, talking, singing, etc.) which are critical for healthy development.” [2]





The study was presented at the 2017 Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting in San Francisco.


Gadgets like smartphones and tablets are fun, and can be very educational, but they are also associated with stress and anxiety in families that fail to set appropriate boundaries for their use, particularly when it comes to when children can use the devices, and for how long.


As a result, many young children are growing up to be completely dependent on technology. According to the discouraging findings of a study published last spring, about 59% of children ages 12-18 are addicted to their smartphones.


Yet another study published last fall showed that kids as young as 6 are so glued to technology, that even having a phone, tablet, or computer in the room is enough to prevent them from sleeping.


Some adults aren’t much better, let’s be honest. But setting guidelines now may help the littlest ones among us to become more balanced and independent when it comes to technology.


Sources:


[1] Health Day


[2] CNN



Storable Food


Sunday, April 23, 2017

Smartphone Use Can Alter The Brain

Smartphone Use Can Alter The Brain | cell-phone1 | General Health Science & Technology Special Interests

By: Janice Wood | Psych Central


The finger movements we use to control our smartphones can actually change brain activity, according to a new Swiss study.


Researchers at the University of Zurich teamed with colleagues at the University of Fribourg to research the day-to-day plasticity of the human brain based on smartphone usage.Smartphone Use Can Alter The Brain | smartphones | General Health Science & Technology Special Interests


The phones provide a fertile source of data, said Dr. Arko Ghosh from the Institute of Neuroinformatics of the University of Zurich.



“Smartphones offer us an opportunity to understand how normal life shapes the brains of ordinary people,” he said.




The researchers studied the activation in the sensorimotor cortex, which is triggered by finger movements.


They used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure the cortical brain activity in 37 right-handed people, including 26 who were touchscreen smartphone users and 11 who had old cellphones. The researchers placed 62 electrodes on the test subject’s heads to record activity based on thumb, forefinger, and middle finger movements on the phones.


The results revealed that the cortical representation in touchscreen smartphone users was different compared to people with conventional cellphones.


Ghosh said he also was able to demonstrate that the frequency of smartphone usage influences cortical activity. The more a smartphone had been used in the previous 10 days, the greater the signal in the brain, he noted.


This correlation was the strongest in the area that represented the thumb, he added.



“At first glance, this discovery seems comparable to what happens in violinists,” he said.



The researchers were able to draw two distinctions: First, how long smartphone users have owned and used a device does not play a role. In the case of violinists, however, the activity in the brain depended on the age at which they started playing.


Secondly, there is a linear connection between the activation in the brain and the most recent use of a smartphone, while there was no evidence of this for violinists in earlier studies, the researchers noted.



“The digital technology we use on a daily basis shapes the sensory processing in our brains − and on a scale that surprised us,” Ghosh said.



Source: University of Zurich

Smartphone Use Can Alter The Brain

Smartphone Use Can Alter The Brain | cell-phone1 | General Health Science & Technology Special Interests

By: Janice Wood | Psych Central


The finger movements we use to control our smartphones can actually change brain activity, according to a new Swiss study.


Researchers at the University of Zurich teamed with colleagues at the University of Fribourg to research the day-to-day plasticity of the human brain based on smartphone usage.Smartphone Use Can Alter The Brain | smartphones | General Health Science & Technology Special Interests


The phones provide a fertile source of data, said Dr. Arko Ghosh from the Institute of Neuroinformatics of the University of Zurich.



“Smartphones offer us an opportunity to understand how normal life shapes the brains of ordinary people,” he said.




The researchers studied the activation in the sensorimotor cortex, which is triggered by finger movements.


They used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure the cortical brain activity in 37 right-handed people, including 26 who were touchscreen smartphone users and 11 who had old cellphones. The researchers placed 62 electrodes on the test subject’s heads to record activity based on thumb, forefinger, and middle finger movements on the phones.


The results revealed that the cortical representation in touchscreen smartphone users was different compared to people with conventional cellphones.


Ghosh said he also was able to demonstrate that the frequency of smartphone usage influences cortical activity. The more a smartphone had been used in the previous 10 days, the greater the signal in the brain, he noted.


This correlation was the strongest in the area that represented the thumb, he added.



“At first glance, this discovery seems comparable to what happens in violinists,” he said.



The researchers were able to draw two distinctions: First, how long smartphone users have owned and used a device does not play a role. In the case of violinists, however, the activity in the brain depended on the age at which they started playing.


Secondly, there is a linear connection between the activation in the brain and the most recent use of a smartphone, while there was no evidence of this for violinists in earlier studies, the researchers noted.



“The digital technology we use on a daily basis shapes the sensory processing in our brains − and on a scale that surprised us,” Ghosh said.



Source: University of Zurich

Monday, April 17, 2017

Tesla Faces New Model 3 Delay As German Workers Threaten Strike; More Headaches For Musk Emerge

In the latest potential setback for the on-time delivery of Tesla"s Model 3, I4U reports that Tesla is facing a potential strike at its new German subsidiary. Tesla acquired Grohmann, a specialized machine manufacturer, for about $150 million several months ago and now the German Trade Union IG Metall has warned that it is exploring a worker strike at Tesla Grohmann. A key supplier, the machines built at Tesla Grohmann are used to manufacture the Model 3. As a result, the Model 3 production start in July could face another imminent delay.


According to I4U, the 660 Tesla Grohmann employees are paid 25 to 30% less than the union rate. While Tesla, which says it seeks to maintain good relations with Grohmann workers including competitive wages, has offered to pay each employee €150 per month more that does not satisfy IG Metall. Tesla has also offered to increase compensation through a Tesla stock program, however that will be a tough sell as German workers are not used to this kind of compensation.


As a result, the trade union is exploring the possibility of a strike at Tesla Grohmann next week, IG Metall Trier speaker Patrick Georg told the German Welt am Sonntag newspaper, with the union stating that "we’re checking next week if a strike is possible."


Meanwhile, Tesla has cancelled all outside contracts at Grohmann. This move has fueled the labor dispute as employees fear about their jobs. Tesla has countered that it plans to grow Tesla Grohmann, but the focus is on its own needs for machines to make electric cars. Another factor for the increased insecurity of the Grohmann workers is the sudden departure of the founder.


The launch of the Model 3 has already been delayed later than originally planned. Another delay would give the competition more time to counter the looming flood of the electric car market with the affordable Model 3. Elon Musk confirmed last week that the final production version of the Model 3 will be unveiled in July, although a prolonged strike will likely lead to further delays.


* * *


Separately, in another union-related complication, Electrek reports that the United Auto Workers union has tentatively probed Tesla’s Fremont factory to potentially join their union on a few occasions in the past few years, but it looked like they quickly let it go. This time, however, appears to be different since the organization has kept the pressure on the company since a first publicized effort in February.


According to Electrek the UAW sent out organizers who have now enlisted “community groups”, mainly labor groups, to call on Elon Musk and Tesla “to revise their strict confidentiality agreement to allow employees to discuss working conditions” – aka “talk about unionizing.” Since the beginning of the effort to unionize, a few employees have gone public about concerns they have with salary and working conditions at the plant.


In February, CEO Elon Musk said that he would investigate the claims and a week later, he addressed the concerns in an email to all employees, which was leaked. It seemed to have stopped the UAW’s effort until now. A recurring concern that came up in the previous complaints is that the confidentiality agreement that Tesla makes its employees sign is “preventing them from speaking up about working conditions”.


It seems to be the main issue brought up in this new letter to Musk that the UAW signed, along with other local labor groups. The full UAW letter can be found here.





That’s the second effort of the sort. In January, local California state assembly members reached out to Tesla to ask the same thing.



In his response, Tesla General Counsel Todd Maron clearly stated that the confidentiality agreement is to prevent leaks about Tesla’s products and business, and that it is not about preventing employees from discussing work conditions.



While the UAW and a few employees have been vocal about their concerns over working conditions at Tesla Fremont, it’s impossible to say if it’s actually a widespread sentiment among the more than 6,000 workers at the plant. In the past, UAW President Dennis Williams said that they were “respecting Tesla’s startup status” up until now, but they are seeking to get involved apparently since Tesla is about to increase its production capacity with the Model 3, which could involve hiring 3,000 more workers at the plant.


* * *


Meanwhile, as Tesla is facing growing labor pains, Apple continues to gain ground on the holy grail pursued by both Tesla and Uber: self-driving cars. On Friday, Reuters reported that Apple has secured a permit to test autonomous vehicles in California, "fuelling speculation that it is working on self-driving car technology in a crowded arena of companies hoping to offer those cars to the masses."





The permit allows it to conduct test drives in three vehicles with six drivers, the state Department of Motor Vehicles said on Friday. The vehicles are all 2015 Lexus RX450h, according to the DMV.



Although it has never openly acknowledged it is looking into building an electric car, Apple has recruited dozens of auto experts in recent years, and the permit pulls the curtain back a bit on any possible plan.



"This does confirm what"s long been rumored: that Apple is at least toying with the idea of getting into the autonomous game in some capacity," said Chris Theodore, president of consultancy Theodore & Associates, and a former vice president at Ford Motor and Chrysler.



While Apple executives have been traditionally coy about their interest in cars, Tim Cook has suggested that Apple wants to move beyond integration of Apple smartphones into vehicle infotainment systems. In doing so, Apple joins a growing list of traditional carmakers, technology companies, and small start ups to test drive cars in California - all vying to be the first to have commercially viable vehicles on the roads.


* * *


Finally, in today"s Heard on the Street, the WSJ"s Charlie Grant once again looks at the age old question: "what is Tesla really worth", noting that even as Tesla becomes the most valuable US carmaker by market cap, its profits remain far behind:





"Tesla now trades at 271 times projected 2018 adjusted earnings, according to FactSet.  Ford and GM, in contrast, trade at less than seven and six times the 2018 estimate, respectively. Tesla gets that valuation because it is expected to upend the auto industry, while earning big profits that would bring down the multiple."



Is that possible? Here is Grant"s math on what Tesla, which sold about 76,000 cars in 2016 and lost $675 million on sales of $7 billion, would need to do:





... to actually earn enough profits to reduce Tesla’s multiple to something in the realm of reasonable would require almost heroic assumptions. First, the basics: Say Tesla’s valuation should be 10 times higher than GM and Ford’s, and say Tesla’s share price stays constant at about $300. That means Tesla would need to earn $4.29 a share in 2018, which equals $700 million in total net income, assuming the current share count doesn’t change.



And the assumptions:





CEO Elon Musk forecasts Tesla can produce 500,000 cars in 2018, while analysts, a bullish lot, peg the number of deliveries at 302,000. Let’s say the delivery number is 380,000. Pencil in an average selling price of $50,000—Tesla will still be selling high-priced Model S and Model X vehicles along with the  Model 3. That scenario yields just under $21 billion in automotive revenue. Add another $2 billion in sales from its residential solar and energy businesses. If Tesla gets the same 5.4% operating margin that  GM and Ford averaged last year, it would generate operating income of $1.1 billion. Subtract $200 million for interest expense and tax the remainder at 25%: The result is $700 million in net income, giving Tesla a multiple roughly 10 times bigger than GM and Ford.



The bottom line: "the company would have to quintuple the number of cars it sells, earn margins equivalent to those of its highly efficient competitors and not sell new shares." It is also priced to perfection: should any of these variables be adversely revised, be it lower sales, lower margin, lower selling price, and Tesla doesn’t come close to earning enough to get to 10 times the multiple of its bigger rivals by the end of 2018.


Oh well, as Grant concludes that just like during the dot com bubble, "valuation has never mattered before for Tesla’s investors and it may not matter at the end of next year. Shareholders may be willing to wait five years instead of two for Tesla to generate big profits, or they may continue to figure that valuation doesn’t matter for a game-changer like Tesla."


One thing is clear: the longer TSLA shareholders wait to take Musk to task, giving him the benfit of the doubt, the more tweets such as these will hit Musk" timeline, which instead of focusing on fundamentals...





... suggest that the genius inventor is more interested in even greater boondoggles and even more burned cash, even as Musk"s personal vendetta with shorts and competitors grows. 



For now, judging by Tesla"s record price, it"s working.

Saturday, April 8, 2017

'Killfie' Nation - India Dominates World's Selfie-Related Deaths

The trend of taking death-defying "killfies" is taking its toll in a Darwinian sense... on India!


The rise of smartphones and social media has paved the way for selfies to become a popular pastime for young people around the world, but as Statista"s Felix Richter notes, sometimes people hunting for the perfect self-portrait get carried away though and put themselves and sometimes others in harm’s way. Tragic as it is, researchers from the United States and India have found that taking selfies in dangerous situations cost at least 127 lives since March 2014.


The researchers scoured the web for news articles reporting selfie-related deaths in an effort to raise awareness and help prevent further injuries or deaths as a consequence of reckless selfie-taking. Ridiculous as it may sound, there are many ways to harm yourself while taking a selfie. The cases found by the researchers include several people falling from great heights, drowning or accidently shooting themselves while taking a selfie with a gun.


Photographers appear to be particularly careless in India where the researchers found the most reports of selfie-related accidents by far.


Infographic: Don


You will find more statistics at Statista

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Apple Censors US-Drone-Strike-Tracking App

Authored by James Holbrooks via TheAntiMedia.org,






“At its core was a question: do we want to be as connected to our foreign policy as we are to our smartphones? My hypothesis was no. Americans don’t care about the drone war because it is largely hidden from view.”



That’s how Josh Begley, writing for The Intercept on Tuesday, described the concept behind an app he created five years ago. The app, he says, was a simple one. It merely sent users an alert every time a U.S. drone strike was reported in the news.


Apple rejected the app three times on the grounds that it was “excessively objectionable or crude content,” but Begley didn’t give up on the project.





“Over the years, I would occasionally resubmit the app, changing its name from Drones+ to Metadata+,” he wrote. “I was curious to see if Apple might change its mind. The app didn’t include graphic images or video of any kind — it simply aggregated news about covert war.



He went on to tell how, after five rejections, Apple finally accepted the app in 2014. It remained in the App Store for a year and was downloaded by over 50,000 people. But then, the following September, Apple removed the app, once again citing “excessively objectionable or crude content.”


Begley persisted. The reason he was writing the post this week, in fact, was because that day — March 28, 2017 — Apple had once again accepted the app. He wasn’t writing to talk about his ordeal with Apple, though. He was writing about the issue that motivated him to create the app in the first place:





“As an artist who works with data, I think the story of this app is about more than a petty conflict with Apple. It is about what can be seen — or obscured — about the geography of our covert wars.”



He pointed out that over the past 15 years, people have worked tirelessly to document what’s happening on the ground where these drone campaigns are being waged. And that work is certainly praiseworthy. But Begley went further, pointing out what he calls the “difficult truth” of drone warfare — that at the end of the day, we don’t really know who these missiles are killing.


Again, rather than focusing on his spat with Apple, Begley stayed with the issue that inspired him and talked about the end product of that inspiration:





“Because the particulars of drone wars are scant, we only have ‘metadata’ about most of these strikes—perhaps a date, the name of a province, maybe a body count. Absent documentary evidence or first-person testimony, there isn’t much narrative to speak of.



“The name ‘Metadata’ has a double meaning: the app both contains metadata about English-language news reports, and it refers to the basis on which most drone strikes are carried out.”



The only time Begley questioned Apple’s earlier decisions to refuse his app was in his summation.





“Smartphones have connected us more intimately to all sorts of data,” he wrote. “Yet information about drone strikes — in Apple’s universe — had somehow been deemed beyond the pale.”



He used the past tense, of course, because Apple had, that very day, re-accepted Metadata. But as it turned out, the party was short-lived. Hours after Begley’s post ran at The Intercept, Apple pulled his app once more.


Highlighting the suddenness of Apple’s move, here’s how Reason opened its coverage of the news on Tuesday:





“This was supposed to be a post about how anybody who wants to easily keep track of U.S. drone strikes overseas can do so through an app on their iPhone. But never mind. They can’t anymore.”



Josh Begley chose not to go after Apple in his article when he easily could have. He took the high road and stuck to the far greater issues — the nature of drone warfare itself and how we, as a society, are responding to it in an age of instant communication.


This writer will follow Begley’s lead and not speculate on the myriad possibilities of why Apple seems afraid of his app. That’s the far less important aspect of what’s happening here. It all goes back to the core of the Metadata project and the question that drove Begley to get started: Given the option, would we really want to be as connected to U.S. foreign policy as we are to our smartphones?


Or, in other words, would we really want constant updates on all the killing?

Monday, March 13, 2017

Apple Spikes On Report It May Announce New Products As Soon As Next Week

AAPL stock briefly spiked in what may have been yet another stop hunt moments ago, following a MacRumors report that Apple is expected to announce new products later this month, most likely between Monday, March 20 and Friday, March 24, citing "reputable" supply chain analysts.



The analysts did not disclose which products it expects Apple to announce, but rumors have suggested at least a trio of new iPad Pro models will be unveiled as early as this month, including a new 10.5-inch model with slimmer bezels and updated 9.7-inch and 12.9-inch versions.





The sources expecting an iPad refresh include, among others, KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, Barclays analyst Blayne Curtis, and Japanese blog Mac Otakara. The latter of the three also expects a new 7.9-inch model that would supplant the iPad mini 4, but others have denied or yet to mention that particular claim. 



Last month, Japanese blog Mac Otakara said Apple will host a March event where it will debut its new iPad Pro lineup, a larger iPhone SE model with 128GB storage, and new Apple Watch bands. The report also claimed Apple will add a red color option for iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus, which could be part of (PRODUCT)RED.





The all-new 10.5-inch iPad Pro is expected to have slimmer bezels, and possibly no Home button, allowing it to have the same overall footprint as the 9.7-inch iPad Pro. This design could foreshadow the rumored 5.8-inch iPhone. The tablet is also rumored to have a higher-resolution display and quad microphones.



The updated 12.9-inch iPad Pro is said to feature a 12-megapixel rear camera and True Tone display like the current 9.7-inch model, using advanced four-channel ambient light sensors to automatically adapt the color and intensity of the display to match the light in the surrounding environment.



On the other hand, Apple has yet to invite the media to an event this month, and those invites would be a far shoter notice than usual if Tim Cook is indeed planning to announce new products this way as early as next week.  In each of the past two years, Apple invited the media to its March event roughly 11-12 days beforehand, including February 26 invites for a March 9 event in 2015 and March 10 invites for a March 21 event last year, MacRumor notes.


Which, according to the website, means that there are three plausible scenarios if new products are in the cards:


  • Apple is planning a March event, and invites will go out soon;

  • Apple is planning a Spring event, but not this month; or

  • Apple will share its announcements through a press release as it did when it dropped the price of the fourth-generation iPad to $399 in March 2014.

Another rumor suggested Apple could be planning an event on April 4, but this date was based on Personal Pickup for the 12.9-inch iPad Pro, which is generally not a reliable indicator of an event. The in-store pickup date for 12.9-inch iPad Pro models is a rolling target, as evidenced by the April 10 date now shown.


For now, there is no indication that a new iPhone is coming any time soon, which may be the reason why after the initial spike higher, AAPL stock has since given up the kneejerk gains.

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

China Telecom Giant ZTE Pleads Guilty, To Pay $1.2 Billion Penalty For Selling US Tech To Iran

In Wilbur Ross" first public announcement, the former hedge fund manger and current Trump commerce secretary announced that China"s telecommunications giant ZTE has agreed to pay a total of $1.2 billion in penalties and plead guilty to violating U.S. sanctions on Iran, selling US technology to Tehran, and obstructing a federal investigation, ending a five-year probe that has raised trade tensions between the U.S. and China. The penalty was among the largest ever in a sanctions case.


ZTE was accused that over a six-year-long period, it planned to obtain technology products from the U.S., incorporate them into ZTE equipment and ultimately ship the equipment to Iran. The company agree to settle because as the WSJ adds, it avoided a more-devastating supply cutoff of U.S. components, which the Commerce Department slapped on ZTE in March 2016 and immediately suspended as a settlement was negotiated. Without key components such as Qualcomm processors for its smartphones, ZTE’s ability to produce some of its major products could have been crippled in a matter of months, putting it at the risk of bankruptcy.


The Chinese telecom giant will pay an initial fine of $892 million as part of the settlement, and will plead guilty to conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, among other charges, in the agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce, Department of Treasury and Department of Justice.


“The highest levels of management within the company approved the scheme,” and the company “repeatedly lied to and misled federal investigators,” said Mary McCord, who runs the Justice Department’s national security division.


The Commerce Department investigation followed reports by Reuters in 2012 that ZTE had signed contracts to ship millions of dollars worth of hardware and software from some of the best-known U.S. technology companies to Iran"s largest telecoms carrier.


"ZTE acknowledges the mistakes it made, takes responsibility for them, and remains committed to positive change in the company," ZTE Chairman and Chief Executive Zhao Xianming said on Tuesday in a statement. An agreement caps a year of uncertainty for the Shenzhen-based company, which in March 2016 was placed on a list of entities that U.S. suppliers could not work with without a license. ZTE acted contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests, the Commerce Department said at the time.


Commerce will recommend that ZTE be removed from that list if the company lives up to its deal and a court approves its agreement with the Justice Department.


According to Reuters, ZTE said it has agreed to an additional penalty of $300 million to a division of the Commerce Department that will be suspended during a seven-year term on the condition that the company complies with requirements in the agreement. The settlement includes $101 million to settle potential civil liability for Iran sanction violations. The action marks the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control"s largest settlement to date with a non-financial entity.


One of the world’s biggest telecommunications gear makers and the No. 4 smartphone vendor in the United States, ZTE sells handset devices to U.S. mobile carriers AT&T, T-Mobile US  and Sprint. It relies on U.S. companies including Qualcomm, Microsoft and Intel for components.