Robert Hampton

Ironically, the latest victim of a Twitter mob is… Twitter itself.

On Thursday the microblogging site announced a new policy on deleting or withholding Tweets. A lot of users have interpreted this as censorship and have gone so far as to call for a Twitter blackout in protest.

I’m all for a good Twitter mob wielding virtual pitchforks, #flamingtorches and 140-character protest chants. But in this case the mob is wrong – here’s why:

1. The new policy is almost exactly the same as the previous one. Twitter has always responded to legitimate demands to remove illegal content, such as DMCA takedown notices against tweets linking to pirated content. The main difference now is that content can be removed on a country-by-country basis rather than censored worldwide.
2. Oppressive governments will block Twitter anyway. During the height of the Egyptian protests last year, the internet was effectively turned off in that country. During the disputed 2009 election in Iran, the government blocked access to Twitter and other social networking sites, forcing users there to find ways round the block. In China, Twitter is blocked entirely. Is a censored Twitter worse than no Twitter at all?
3. Twitter is being open and accountable about their policy: affected users will be informed when a Tweet has been “censored”, and Twitter has teamed up with Chilling Effects to list all takedown notices it receives, so users can see for themselves what is being censored.

Mashable has a good post about Twitter’s announcement and why the new policy could actually be good for activists in the long run.

Today was the day of the great protest against SOPA, the draconian law currently being debated by US lawmakers which would introduce harsh penalties for anyone sharing illegally copyrighted content online. The proposed law is strongly supported by most of the large media conglomerates (and Louise Mensch) who want to crack down on online piracy. However, critics claim that SOPA is a broad and far-reaching piece of legislation which will stifle innovation and individual freedom online.

We were promised a day of action, with high-profile web sites “going dark” for the day to draw attention to the chilling effect the proposed law would have on online free speech. Lots of big names were mentioned, but did they actually follow through? Well, yes and no.

Boing Boing and Reddit both did a full disappearing act, in both cases replacing their usual site with a holding page explaining the protest.

Wikipedia, at first glance, was also blacked out… but their blackout was a bit of Javascript trickery. Disable scripting (or go to the mobile site) and the information was still there, enabling savvier schoolchildren to continue cutting and pasting their GCSE coursework.

There was much excitement when Google announced they were joining the protest, but their “blackout” was little more than altering the Google logo on their homepage. Therefore, SOPA is at least as important to Google as the 110th anniversary of the Uganda Railway.

There was a rumour that Facebook would join in. They did post an anti-SOPA message, but the site itself is unaffected, to the relief of the millions who need to attend to Farmville and post photos of themselves drinking too much.

All things considered, today’s protest is a bit of a damp squid.

However, the lacklustre effort made by some today should not distract from the fact that SOPA is a real threat, not just in the US, but worldwide. Look at the case of Richard O’Dwyer, a British man who is fighting to prevent his extradition to the US to face copyright infringement charges, despite the UK authorities deciding not to pursue him. If SOPA passes, US officials could be knocking on doors of people all over the UK. Think about that next time you’re tempted to use a Katy Perry song as background music for that YouTube video of your cats.

Last night I got home, plugged my iPhone into my computer, and got this message:

Yes, after a summer of feverish anticipation, iOS 5 has finally made it out of Apple HQ and onto the flash drives of eager users everywhere.

Well, almost. The first time I tried to download it, the download aborted after about 50 megabytes (although I think that might have been my dodgy wi-fi). It worked the second time, but that proved to be the easy step, as every attempt to install it was met with this message:

I wasn’t the only one. Error 3200 was trending on Twitter for much of Wednesday evening. It didn’t help that the “More Information” button linked to an Apple support page which didn’t even mention error 3200 (although it has now been belatedly added).

Read the rest of this post »

Oddly enough, I heard the news of the death of technology giant Steve Jobs this morning not through a computer or iAnything, but via that most old-fashioned of sources – the 7am news on BBC Radio 4. However, I immediately fired up the Twitter app on my iPhone, where everyone from Barack Obama to Wil Wheaton was weighing in with a tribute.

It’s impossible to overstate Jobs’ contribution to the world of technology, but his finest hour must surely be his masterminding of the turnaround in Apple’s fortunes. When Jobs returned to the company in 1996, it was near bankruptcy, seemingly defenceless against the rise of PCs and Windows. Many analysts believed that a return to profitability was impossible, and with a lesser person at the helm, they would probably have been correct. Without Jobs, Apple would have gone the way of Acorn, Commodore, Atari and countless other names from the early years of home computing.

With Apple’s co-founder back in charge, the company not only came back from the brink, but went on to incredible success with a new line of products. It’s true the iPod wasn’t the first MP3 player and the iPhone wasn’t the first mobile phone, but Apple’s take on the concepts (with the influence of Jobs tangible in every detail of the designs) resulted in products that were genuine game-changers.

And now he’s gone, leaving some enormous shoes to fill. Apple, and the world in general will feel his loss for a very, very long time.

“Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.”

There are all sorts of rumours swirling around about the new product to be unveiled by Apple tomorrow. It’s an iPhone 4S! It’s an iPhone 5! It’ll have a super-HD camera! Maybe it won’t! It’ll make you cups of tea! It’ll provide better sex than your partner!

I am refusing to get swept up in the excitement. I’m just enjoying my final days of having the latest and best model, before I am rendered hopelessly out of date by whatever is announced tomorrow.

In September 2010, the first It Gets Better video was created as a response to a spate of suicides by bullied gay teens. Author and columnist Dan Savage, frustrated that many US schools refused to provide any form of support or protection, created the video to address gay youth directly and give them an important message: “You are not alone”.

Nine months later, 20,000 people have followed his lead and made their own It Gets Better videos on YouTube. Google used the campaign as the basis for an ad campaign in America, a demonstration of how ordinary people can use the web to change the world.

Now, a UK version of that advert has been created and is airing in various slots on British TV. A cynical person might say that this is Google jumping on the bandwagon to get some good publicity for their Chrome browser, but the overall effect is still lovely:

As a gay, I am legally obliged to adore Lady Gaga*. Her new album Born This Way has just come out and naturally I made a beeline to my computer to buy it. Actually that was a lie – I was already at my computer, because as well as being gay, I am a total nerd.

Where was I? Oh yes, the album and such. I was about to click to buy the CD, when I spied that Amazon were selling the MP3 download for just £3.99, saving me seven or eight quid over the physical copy. How could I say no to an offer like that? Quite easily, in fact.

You see, I actually quite like CDs. You would think that I — being a child of the microcomputer revolution — would embrace the future like [NAME REDACTED] embraces Big Brother contestants. But there’s something about CDs that is lost in MP3 format, which means I’ll be sticking to CDs for now, thanks.

Don’t get me wrong, a lot of the early objections to digital music no longer apply. MP3 downloads are now ridiculously cheap — often significantly cheaper than CD. They are also, for the most part, free of that annoying Digital Rights Management which requires you to continually prove to your computer that you are legally entitled to play the music you’ve already paid for.

Of course there are many advantages to MP3 downloads. The music is instantly available as soon as you’ve handed over your credit card details. You can keep your entire music collection in something the size of a matchbox and take it with you wherever you want – I have an iPod, and my first action when I get a new CD is to rip it into iTunes. For new and struggling musicians, the lower distribution costs of MP3 can offer big cost savings over the traditional methods of music distribution.

But there’s just something about actually holding a shiny, tangible CD that the MP3 experience can’t replicate. As an example, let’s compare what people who bought Patrick Wolf’s The Magic Position on CD got compared to MP3 downloaders:-

For those who took the trouble to get a CD, a pretty inlay sheet with lovely artwork and sleeve notes. For MP3 downloaders? A folder full of icons in Windows Explorer. Yes, you see the CD cover art in iTunes or Windows Media Player, but it’s NOT THE SAME.

I’m fully aware that I’m sounding like an old man complaining about how things were much better in “the good old days”. For the record, here are some other obsolete technologies which I wish were still current: Ceefax, BSB squarials, Acorn computers, Class 101 DMUs.

* This is of course not true, I just wanted an attention-grabbing opening paragraph.

Apparently, Nintendo 3DS sales are below expectations and the gaming giant’s marketing people are planning a new campaign for those of us who don’t “get” it.

My nephew got a 3DS at launch, and I managed to wrest it out of his hands for ten minutes to have a go. Well, I say ten minutes – the first 6 or 7 minutes were spent adjusting the 3D to a point where I could see the screen properly without going cross-eyed. A few minutes of Pilotwings Resort was all I could manage, because I felt thoroughly sick from the 3D effect. Maybe it’s just me.

It’s academic anyway, because at this moment in time I don’t have the money to spare for a 3DS. So I’ve decided to simulate the effect by playing my DSlite while wearing glasses that were prescribed for somebody else. I will then hit myself repeatedly over the head to ensure I get a terrible migraine.

Interesting news emerged over the past few days that many smartphones collect data on the user’s location and store it in a hidden file, with the data being used to improve geographic targeting of adverts. The first revelations involved the iPhone, but Google’s Android software also does something similar.

The Register explained why such tracking could be harmful. Outside of technology circles, however, there has been a distinct lack of outrage. In a world where everyone (except me, apparently) is checking in on Foursquare or Facebook Places every two minutes, I suppose that shouldn’t surprise me.

Judging by the number of Tweets in my feed from mobile phones, which display completely inaccurate locations, the technology is far from perfect in any case.

If they ever do a new version of Catchphrase, Mr Chips could actually be a contestant:-

IBM’s supercomputer Watson has trounced its two competitors in a televised show pitting human brains against computer bytes.

After a three night marathon on the quiz show Jeopardy, Watson emerged victorious to win a $1million (£622,000) prize.

The really worrying thing here is that Jeopardy usually uses a “returning champion” format where the winner comes back the next day to play again. That computer could conceivably play indefinitely, winning thousands of dollars every day. After a few years, it would own most of the world’s wealth. And then you have all sorts of problems – can a computer open a bank account, for example?

I, for one welcome this development, and plan to enjoy the few years I have left before the inevitable day when robots overthrow human civilisation.