<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Stoss&#039; Home &#187; Twitter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stoss.ca/wp/tag/twitter/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stoss.ca/wp</link>
	<description>The Musings of a Techie Canuck</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:53:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Publicly Private</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/publicly-private</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/publicly-private#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:33:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=303</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I’m tired of reading about people ‘losing privacy’ with Facebook and Twitter. People are not losing their privacy; they are losing their common sense. There was an article this morning in the paper which cited examples of ‘loss of privacy’:</p> <p>1)      A UK worker being fired for comments that her job was boring.</p> <p>2)      Employees [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I’m tired of reading about people ‘losing privacy’ with Facebook and Twitter. People are not losing their privacy; they are losing their common sense. There was an article this morning in the paper which cited examples of ‘loss of privacy’:</p>
<p>1)      A UK worker being fired for comments that her job was boring.</p>
<p>2)      Employees in a service industry being reprimanded for posting negative comments about customers on their social sites.</p>
<p>3)      Causing of problems in relationships when one person makes relationship-based remarks, or when a person ‘updates their relationship status’ without approval of the other party.</p>
<p>Hold on, none of those are examples of losing privacy; they all made their opinion public on purpose. Everyone at one time or another is bored at work. Everyone complains about idiots they have to deal with, and everyone has relationship troubles. It isn’t the fact that those people had those thoughts; it is the fact that they consciously made the thought public. Consciously making something known to people is not losing privacy, losing privacy is something that you didn’t make known to people, becoming known to people. For example, having your private diary published, or your best friend write a tell-all book about you, or a doctor telling everyone about your genital herpes is a loss of privacy.  Standing on a box in the middle of Times Square and screaming that you have genital herpes, or handing out free copies of your sex tapes to strangers is not a loss of privacy.</p>
<p>If Facebook openly released all of your pictures to the general public, not just registered Facebook users or specifically your ‘friends’, then that is an invasion, but they don’t (I didn’t say can’t). In fact, they are putting in <em>more</em> restrictions around what can be seen.</p>
<p>We live in a knowledge-starved world. We put Tiger Woods on the front page because we found out he had a secret, but then scream bloody murder when someone finds out ours. We can’t have it both ways.</p>
<p>The sad part is that government agencies are spending millions to study Facebook for security holes, when in reality we live in a society that cares less about privacy and more about reading about our acquaintances’ lives than ever before.  If something isn’t meant to be public, don’t make it public. It is as simple of that. Posting “I’ve had a horrible day,” is enormously different than posting “I hate my boss and work is shit.”  Facebook does not require the <em>same</em> level of professionalism as a man in a suit in front of a microphone (but then again, even Obama called Kanye a “Jackass”), but it does require some common sense.</p>
<p>And you want to talk about privacy? Well how about laws that restrict who you can love/marry, in what orifice you can have sex, or upcoming flight rules that you can either be photographed in an ‘naked scanner’ machine or have your genitalia juggled before you can get on an airplane? We don’t live in a private society at all when a government can invade it like that. BTW: This is for another entry, but ‘naked scanner’ is by far the newest gross exaggerated term. Given the above two options I will gladly let a couple people stare at my colourless, featureless ‘naked’ body only to have the picture removed immediately upon exiting the scanner. It’s not like Playboy is standing behind them saying “Yep, I’ll take that one for our ‘frequent flyers’ issue.” In those pictures you are no more nude than that chick’s silhouette on a trucker’s mud flaps.</p>
<p>This last year 3 or 4 guys got caught for misuse of a firearm and animal cruelty because they did really stupid, depraved things to a duck during a hunting trip. They got caught, not because someone discovered the duck, but because they posted themselves on YouTube doing it. Had that not happened, the ducks would have decayed or been eaten and, assuming they wouldn’t brag about it (which is a stretch based on the video), they certainly wouldn’t have been charged.</p>
<p>Why haven’t we learned from this? Because we are not used to a truly global media. While screaming on top of a box in Times Square all of your dirty secrets certainly isn’t maintaining privacy, it is not the same as electronically posting something that within seconds the entire world can see&#8230; Until, of course, someone starts streaming your NYC rant. Which really poses the question, do we have any privacy anymore? If anyone can video/photograph us doing anything and YouTube it, wouldn’t you think that would make everyone more afraid than the stuff they knowingly post? It sure does for me&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2010/publicly-private/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wave of the Future</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wave]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The beta of Google Wave has started, and I begged and grovelled for an invite and a friend was gracious enough to send one over. Here are my first thoughts.</p> <p>Google Wave will change virtual communication. It won&#8217;t be over night, and it won&#8217;t be accepted by all, but then again Facebook was founded in 2004 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-283" title="Google Wave" src="http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/wave.jpg" alt="Google Wave" width="200" height="150" />The beta of Google Wave has started, and I begged and grovelled for an invite and a friend was gracious enough to send one over. Here are my first thoughts.</p>
<p>Google Wave <em>will </em>change virtual communication. It won&#8217;t be over night, and it won&#8217;t be accepted by all, but then again Facebook was founded in 2004 and didn&#8217;t take off until 2 years later and Twitter is just finding an audience after 3 years in obscurity.</p>
<p>Social Networking in the virtual world is an interesting beast. While Twitter still hasn&#8217;t found a model to make decent money, and websites that collate/sort/rate/track tweets are popping up everywhere trying to be the first to make financial gain off of Mr. Dorsey&#8217;s brainchild. Facebook went from a simple and usable interface to an ad-centric model where instead of putting your friends at the top put a series of sponsored ads, tailored for you by data mining your profile. How kind. The same can be said about MSN (sic) aka Windows Live Messenger.</p>
<p>Since the Web has grown into a marketer&#8217;s wet dream and consumers are demanding everything for free, there seems to be a skew on the supply and demand charts. Because of that it means the newest challenge is balancing ads and ad space alongside product. And this is where Google thrives. Whether we talk about their minimalistic search engine interface (which makes Yahoo&#8217;s and MSN&#8217;s webpages look like a a 3 year old&#8217;s finger painting from the 60&#8242;s) to the subtle scrolling ads in Gmail: Google has nailed the balance of making free products while still capitalizing on the lust of web marketers.</p>
<p>So what does all of this have to do with Wave changing the virtual communication landscape? Wave currently is a ad-less, persistent, collaborative, realtime, multimedia, open source communication tool. I am sure the lack of ads will end coincidentally at the same time as the beta program. But the rest of my adjectives are a huge distinction from what is currently available.</p>
<p>At the moment products such as WebEx and Net Meeting dominate in the web conferencing space right now. While desktop sharing is a must in our international business world, what these technologies lack is the collaborative nature of a meeting. These products allow one user to display their screens, &#8220;whiteboard&#8221; and allow a basic MSNesque like text chat. While Wave lacks the desktop sharing, the ability to, <em>in real time</em>, share links, sites, photos, and a variety of other &#8220;gadgets&#8221; (polls are quite interesting where people can vote on any question and the tallies are immediately updated). How would this affect taking meeting notes, minutes etc? Every try to take a poll in a group chat room or over a conference call? Think about group projects in a university setting and how much easier it would be to all make decisions from the comfort of your home, in a &#8220;secure&#8221; (more notes on this later) and 100% traceable, copyable, printable way? No more will you argue over who said they&#8217;d print off the report.</p>
<p>Multimedia is a huge plus. How nice is it that you can add a gadget that shows a direct map to your place while you are &#8220;chatting&#8221; about directions to your place. No more need to lose a link in an accidentally closed MSN window, or having a subject less email with a static screenshot attached.  And the small fact that it uses rich text. Now you can give your thoughts headings and highlight important words. Now when you copy and paste from one medium to another you won&#8217; t get stupid bats flying in your post, or lose the spacing/formatting so you have alphabet soup on your screen. In the end this provides a clearer message to the people you are communicating with.(Did I mention inline spell checking?)</p>
<p>Persistence. This is a huge problem with the web in general. Say goodbye to losing a lengthy Facebook message after accidentally clicking &#8220;back&#8221; or closing your browser. Wave stores your details <em>in realtime</em>. If you hit the k button, not only does everyone see that you hit that button, but you can immediately close your browser without any &#8220;save&#8221; keystroke and it persists. Add to that that you can file your sessions, re-open, re-play or continue them at any time and this is the most persistent capability the web offers today. Another key to all of this is that you don&#8217;t have random MSN-style .rtf files saved all over your harddrive with cryptic names like &#8220;chat with John&#8221; or &#8220;sweet cyber sex&#8221;.</p>
<p>Another feature is the concept of &#8220;Public Waves&#8221;. This is(*ahem* will be) the ultimate combination of mIRC, Internet forums, Message boards, CraigsList and knowledge bases. Combine the entire global community speaking on any subject in a realtime fashion with the search and storage capabilities of Google. It&#8217;ll put Yahoo Questions to shame.</p>
<p>And finally on my &#8220;pro&#8217;s&#8221; list, open source.  Once the hardcore geeks get a hold of this (I&#8217;ve already read that the race for the first usable iPhone and Blackberry apps is on) the possibilities are endless. Put on an MSN skin that minimizes the product into a compact chat forum for just you and your friends, build it into a WebEx-like technology to combine realtime knowledge and data share with PowerPoint and desktop presentations. An infinite communication market has just been opened up!</p>
<p>Of course with any great technology comes the bad.  At the moment security is a huge concern. Notwithstanding the recent Google problems with security; Are corporations going to trust their internal data to Google.  I don&#8217;t know the answer to this question. But in the open source world, I am sure that someone can develop quite quickly a security model that addresses the concerns that will undoubtedly arise.</p>
<p>The current interface is clunky and unintuitive and forces you (practically) to be in a full screen mode. This isn&#8217;t useful for most of us in our multitasking culture. Again, open source to the rescue.</p>
<p>The tracking issue. Google is renowned, and routinely chastised, for gathering data. And while I still agree that tracking my searches is a help to me, is tracking every personal/professional conversation I have necessary? I haven&#8217;t read a lot on this topic yet, I hope to shortly, but I have to assume some level of data mining is occurring.  What will this do to corporate use? It would be a stumbling block I am sure for this technology to take off on that front. For the public market? Well, 300 million people use Facebook and that site is entirely about mining data.</p>
<p>WebEx and Net Meeting are bloated and for no good reason. They require downloads and constant updates and still tend to be prone to errors outside of the IE world. Wave has none of these problems. The slickness of Google has yet again struck.</p>
<p>All in all, I 100% agree with Google&#8217;s marketing of this technology that Google Wave is what &#8220;e-mail&#8221; would have been if it was invented from scratch, and not made to mimic the existing postal system we had world wide.It took almost 3 years for Gmail to open to the general public and now it boasts 150 million users, both corporate and personal. I am very excited for the next 3 years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/wave-of-the-future/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trick or Hack!</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/trick-or-hack</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/trick-or-hack#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hackers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=276</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the recent news of the e-mail phishing scam on Gmail, Yahoo! and Hotmail (and presumably others) my blood has been absolutely boiling over the horribly inaccurate, sensationalistic comments that are being published in all sorts of reputable newpapers!</p> <p>First lets be clear:  These guys are NOT hackers. They are not. At very best they [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the <a title="Google targeted in e-mail scam" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8292928.stm" target="_blank">recent news</a> of the e-mail phishing scam on Gmail, Yahoo! and Hotmail (and presumably others) my blood has been absolutely boiling over the horribly inaccurate, sensationalistic comments that are being published in all sorts of reputable newpapers!</p>
<p>First lets be clear:  These guys are NOT hackers. They are not. At very best they are clever people who realized that you can get people that are less clever to tell you things they shouldn&#8217;t. This is not new to e-mail, Facebook, corporate logins&#8230; In fact people take advantage of less clever people all the time. 3card monte in some form has existed for centuries and continues to fool people! Yesterday and today a <a title="Amber Alert in Oshawa WI: Fake Alert Spreads Via Twitter &amp; SMS" href="http://www.nowpublic.com/tech-biz/amber-alert-oshawa-wi-fake-alert-spreads-twitter-sms" target="_blank">fake Amber Alert message</a> has been circulating the web, thousands have been fooled into propagating a false message. Tricking people is not the same as hacking. <a title="mafiaboy" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MafiaBoy" target="_blank">mafiaboy </a>is a hacker. <a title="kevin Mitnik" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mitnick" target="_blank">Kevin Mitnik</a> was a hacker (although he was never malicious and wrongfully imprisoned).</p>
<p>The people who did this have done nothing wrong (I assume the lawyers for the above companies will disagree)&#8230; They asked for people&#8217;s passwords and the people gave them to them, I can do that right now: Please send me your passwords&#8230; In fact post them directly below this entry so that everyone can see them&#8230;. Sure they set up a fancy phishing site and sure they claimed to be someone they aren&#8217;t, but that is immoral, not malicious. Now, the people that <em>use </em>those passwords for malicious purposes are the ones breaking the law. Just as it is illegal for me to open your (snail) mail. (and yes, I concede these people could be one and the same, but it is important to distinguish that, which the media is not)</p>
<p>The problem, and I know I have beaten this to death, is that people seem to think technology is something <em>new</em>, and it isn&#8217;t. It is an <em>adaptation </em>of something. All technology is is an advancement of a previous incarnation of something else. Cell phones are an advancement of cordless phones, which are an advancement from corded phones, where were an enhancement on dial phones, which were an advancement on  the original switchhook phones, and the cycle goes back to the first person to every tie a string between two cups. The concept and basic requirement is the same in all of these cases: I have information and I want to share it with someone who isn&#8217;t within sound wave receiving distance of my voice.</p>
<p>And finally, the calls for &#8220;increased security&#8221; and &#8220;more education&#8221; at these companies is absolutely preposterous.  There is <strong>NO</strong> level of security or education that can prevent a person divulging personal information. How hard is it to understand &#8220;Don&#8217;t tell people your password.&#8221;? And yes, these guys used a sophisticated website to garner this information, but how is Google to prevent people from writing a webpage that looks like theirs? I mean I could mock up a Gmail page and have it be identical to it. How do you teach the mass public to make sure the website they are typing personal data into is legit? Well forward this Blog URL to 15 people and you will find out, because if you don&#8217;t you will have bad sex for the rest of your life! I mean after dozens of friends sending me hundreds of those  over the past 10 years I am sure they all learned that that is a scam&#8230;</p>
<p>Contrary to popular belief, people do not learn from their mistakes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/trick-or-hack/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Technology Killed the Memory Star</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/technology-killed-the-memory-star</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/technology-killed-the-memory-star#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been think a lot about death lately. Before you raise your eyebrows, it isn&#8217;t a bad thing. There have just been a few things in my life lately that brought the subject up. I&#8217;ve outlined a couple below.</p> <p>Firstly, a friend and former co-worker in his late 20&#8242;s lost his battle to cancer a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been think a lot about death lately. Before you raise your eyebrows, it isn&#8217;t a bad thing. There have just been a few things in my life lately that brought the subject up. I&#8217;ve outlined a couple below.</p>
<p>Firstly, a friend and former co-worker in his late 20&#8242;s lost his battle to cancer a few weeks ago. I truly hope he is in a better place now and his suffering has ended. What particularly struck me was that his Facebook page for days was appended with kind and supporting words for him and his family, this was something I hadn&#8217;t seen before.</p>
<p>This made me wonder about the role technology plays in death. This blog is hosted by a 3rd party company which I pay a fee to annually. Assuming my credit card isn&#8217;t cancelled immediately and my passing happened around renewal time, it is fair to say that this page could exist up to a year after me. I am fairly positive Facebook/Twitter and similar web apps have policies around dormant accounts being deleted, but again there would be a lag between my last breath and my account&#8217;s. But once gone from the servers, all my thoughts, all my pictures, everything is gone for good.</p>
<p>Secondly I reference a conversation between Andrew and I on our trip to India. While Andrew is a friend and we know each other well, he certainly  wouldn&#8217;t know my parents, my home town and probably couldn&#8217;t remember the company I work for. This is no slight to him at all. This is the way many friendships start, and I could same about myself in relation to him. The conversation starter was &#8220;what if something had happened to one or both of us on some dark back alley in India?&#8221;</p>
<p>The easy case is both of us &#8220;disappeared&#8221;, because quite frankly that <em>would be it</em>. My friends and family would have no idea where I was. Aside from my odd email home to give an update on recent events, I never gave addresses of hotels or any indication of future plans. Truth be told as we got on the plane to India all we knew was that we were landing in Delhi, nothing more about the rest of our journey.</p>
<p>I read an article once about a man whose girlfriend was on vacation in Hong Kong. She txt&#8217;d him one night saying she was going to bed and was never heard from again. He flew over to Hong Kong with conviction that in a city of 7 million he could track her down. Of course as the news usually goes, I never saw the end of the story. </p>
<p>That was in a city of 7 million, Delhi has 14 million. I doubt very much that doubling the population or even halving it for that matter changes the magnitude of a search like that.</p>
<p>But the case that is more interesting is what if one of us had disappeared.</p>
<p>Back to technology.</p>
<p>When I was in highschool a friend passed away suddenly after being struck by lightning. His closest friends created a collage of photos, printed them on large paper in colour and gave them out in remembrance of him. This poster still hangs on my wall in my room 9 or more years later.</p>
<p>If I fast forward 9 years, will my colleague&#8217;s facebook page still exist? Certianly not.</p>
<p>Technology is a double edged sword. It has the potential to bring us together easier, we can share photos, events, news instantly around the world, but in the same regard, once the medium we use to do that sharing is obsolete we have nothing left but a memory.</p>
<p>If Andrew had disappeared in India, I could have used Facebook or some other technology to find his friends and family and notify them of the situation. We could then use mobile phones, email, webpages, news media etc. to get the word out. While tragic, technology would help me almost isntantly get to the people who need to know, without me having ever met those people. </p>
<p>The other edge? In 30 years we won&#8217;t be able to sit with our grandkids and flip through a photo album. Assuming our harddrives/USB keys/DVD-Rs last that long, we <em>might</em> be able to flip through them on the some antique JPG viewer. But somehow I think this is unlikely. How many memories have you lost because of a harddrive crash? A computer virus? A lost usb key or a misplaced CD? 10 years ago it would have taken a basement flood, or a fire to destroy these things, now it is as simple as a magnetic getting too close to your MacBook or a power surge in your apartment, or a thumbdrive slipping out of your pocket.</p>
<p>I am <em>not </em>a Facebook page, a Twitter account or even this blog. These 3 things are put into an infinite equation that makes up &#8220;me&#8221;. The fact that these will outlast me, regardless of when I die is a scary thought, because that means that in theory  instead of people&#8217;s last memory of me being the last time we met for a beer or our last day of work together, it will be my last blog entry, or my last update on Twitter.</p>
<p>I have been in countless museums and read and seen images on papyrus, animal skins, bark, stone&#8230; These are universal and although they decay, in general they transcend time. They are hundreds and even thousands of years old. You&#8217;d be hard pressed to find something to look at files on a floppy disk these days, and this medium was still widely used just 10 years ago, and jsut plain forget about the technologies the files on those disks are stored in.</p>
<p>I hope I remember the times I had with my friends mentioned above 30 years from now, hell I hope I can remember my own name 30 years from now&#8230; I just don&#8217;t want to have to bet on technology to be the mechanism for my memories.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/technology-killed-the-memory-star/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What a Hack</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/what-a-hack</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/what-a-hack#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:16:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=215</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>It was recently announced that 1 month ago perennial Stoss Blog antagonist Twitter had a security breach when a high ranking executive&#8217;s account was accessed by a &#8220;hacker&#8221;. The hacker correctly guessed the users&#8217;s secret security questions to gain access to the account then surfed through corporate data and released it to well known techie [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was recently announced that 1 month ago perennial Stoss Blog antagonist Twitter had a <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/google/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218500810">security breach</a> when a high ranking executive&#8217;s account was accessed by a &#8220;hacker&#8221;. The hacker correctly guessed the users&#8217;s secret security questions to gain access to the account then surfed through corporate data and released it to well known techie sites. As the hacker himself posted: He did this to make people aware of the importance of security.</p>
<p>The articles I have read have used this as an excuse to bash the practice of &#8220;1 password for all sites&#8221; and the use of easily guessed security questions like &#8220;hometown&#8221; or &#8220;mother&#8217;s maiden name&#8221; which are ubiquitous it seems in the land of web sign up sheets. It&#8217;s almost as if some assmonkey whose only knowledge of security was the aluminum key that locked his pansy-ass diary decided one day it would be great if we could secure our most personal data using such totally secret, impossible-to-find-out data such as our pet&#8217;s name or the street we live on! Yeah, no one would be able to penetrate that code!</p>
<p>But I don&#8217;t so much have a beef with this. It&#8217;s security practices in general, both corporately and personally that are appalling! We focus so much energy on enforcing ridiculous rules that are absolutely unsubstantiated and yet no energy on the flaws in the human logic of password selection.</p>
<p>Here are the fallacy&#8217;s behind my favourite policies:</p>
<p>1) Change your password every 3 months &amp; don&#8217;t use the same password for 10 changes</p>
<p>The genius that came up with this should be shot in the chest simply because it is now become the most ridiculous belief since the Hayley&#8217;s comet morons killed themselves to ride it to utopia. Would you change the lock on your house or your car doors every 3 months? Hell! Most people don&#8217;t change them when they move or sell their car! How many previous owners have a key to your house do you think? I have never figured out the logic behind this absolute waste of time policy that does about as much good as putting duct tape over your monitor to stop UV radiation. If someone finds out your password, they aren&#8217;t going to wait for 3 months then go, &#8220;drat, foiled again!&#8221; when it fails. It only takes a few minutes to download the entire contents of your harddrive, so by the logic of preventing data theft we should change our password every 5 minutes, right? If anything this <em>helps</em> hackers, because people are <em>not</em> random! We get lazy and append a number or capitalize a different letter to form our new password, so a hacker can guess for months on end and, once he has &#8220;your pattern&#8221;, will perpetually have access to your account. And this is the reason why not using the same password for 10 changes makes no sense! If anything this <em>encourages </em>using mypassword0 through mypassword9.<br />
I also love the idea of &#8220;3 months&#8221; and &#8220;10 changes&#8221; seemingly being industry standards. What possible study could have resulted in these numbers being determined as the &#8220;optimal&#8221; values?<br />
I love policies that seem picked out of a hat and then spoken about like they are a gospel to the industry. As if 91 days is a magic number for a criminal to guess your password, so better change it before day 90!</p>
<p>2) Password strength monitors and post-its</p>
<p>&#8220;Don&#8217;t tell anyone your PIN&#8221;, &#8220;Never write down your password&#8221;, &#8220;We will never ask for your password in an email&#8221;. BUT what we will do is analyze every character and tell you if your password is &#8220;strong&#8221; enough. Strong enough for what? To knock out Superman? To cut a diamond? We are talking about basic mathematics here. A password of length 5 made up of all small letter only has about 12 million combinations, throw in one capital and it is about 60 million combinations. Throw in a number somewhere on top of that and you are now at 3.5 billion combinations! That is a pretty big number. But consider most companies/websites have a 3 wrong and you&#8217;re out policy (A policy that <em>does</em> make sense), that is a hell of a lot of attempts on your password and if you can&#8217;t figure out after the ten thousandth time your account was locked that someone was hacking you than you deserve to be shot like the guy who proposed the stupid policy above.<br />
The thing here is that the combination of letters, number, capitals and special characters is almost irrelevant, the most secure password is random, entirely random. I am still using a random letter combination I got generated for me by Geocities when I had my first webpage over 12 years ago. Sure, mathmatically it is probably trivial for a random generator to exhaustively guess it, most personal computers can do 1 billion+ calculations a second. But the point is it ain&#8217;t that likely! Just don&#8217;t use a simple dictionary word like &#8220;idiot&#8221; or &#8220;password&#8221; and you are probably in good shape.<br />
I also love how secure it is that we are typing in a password that no one is supposed to know, but it can tell you &#8220;how strong&#8221; it is, meaning somewhere your password characters are analyzed. How is that different than me saying &#8220;psst, tell me your password 1 character at a time and I&#8217;ll tell you if you need more numbers or capitals, but don&#8217;t worry, my mind will forget it immediately&#8221;.<br />
And of course this is where post its come in. The problem is not writing your password down, it is writing it down in the context of your computer and login. For instance:<br />
Stupid: Writing your password in permanent ink on your monitor<br />
Bad: Writing your password down and placing it in the top right drawer at the office<br />
Less Bad: Writing it on the birthday square of your mother in a day planner you keep with you that has no reference to what that random word could mean or what login is associated with it.<br />
Even better. Hiding it in a tattoo on your ass, written backwards and upside down. Of course you&#8217;d have 10 of them and have to re-design it every 3 months&#8230;.<br />
Writing a random word and placing it in a random location is not a bad idea at all! In fact if anything it&#8217;s a safeguard in case someone needs access to your data!</p>
<p>Locking all of your secrets behind a single alphanumeric combination is as logical as locking a door to a convertable or keeping your safe key hanging on the number dial. However in this day of technology we have to have something to allow us secured access to our information, and until we all scan our eyes, fingers and ass prints into a global database or want to prick our finger for DNA each time we want to read email, we are stuck with it. Be smart and just don&#8217;t fall into the trap and think that your security policies actually have as much bearing on security as they do on wasting your time. Oh and I know your mother&#8217;s maiden name and eye colour, so don&#8217;t use those as your &#8220;secret&#8221; questions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/what-a-hack/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Re-Linking</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-re-linking</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-re-linking#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Those of you fortunate enough and/or with enough spare time to read my Facebook, Twitter and Blog sites are aware that I recently de-coupled Twitter updates automatically updating Facebook statuses. I did this for a very specific reason, and have just &#8220;un-done&#8221; this for another. I had a few people comment on that decision, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Those of you fortunate enough and/or with enough spare time to read my <a title="Facebook" href="http://www.facebook.com/cstoss" target="_blank">Facebook</a>, <a title="Twitter" href="http://www.twitter.com/StossyStoss" target="_blank">Twitter</a> and <a title="Blog" href="http://Craig.Stoss.ca" target="_self">Blog</a> sites are aware that I recently de-coupled Twitter updates automatically updating Facebook statuses. I did this for a very specific reason, and have just &#8220;un-done&#8221; this for another. I had a few people comment on that decision, and felt I should explain it in more detail.</p>
<p>I think the concept of &#8220;Status&#8221; has vastly changed and continues to evolve in the virtual world we tend to view each other in.</p>
<p>When Facebook first was rising it was no more than MySpace without the annoying interface, I held off signing up for a good couple years, as I was more about &#8220;doing it myself&#8221; at that time. As such, I wrote my own blog program which was basically a minimalistic WordPress without any skins or fancy add-ins and definitely didn&#8217;t dominate in the professional and amateur world of blogging. But it worked for me and allowed me to learn new PHP and CSS skills, so why not?</p>
<p>My &#8220;Status&#8221; at this point was really static. I had a basic About page that essentially (with a little more wit I hope) said: &#8220;I&#8217;m 21 years old @ UoG and I tend to drink a lot of beer&#8221;. But technology and inquiring minds were not content with this dorment and long term relevant data, so as tecnology and speed of access continued to grow, Facebook moved &#8220;Status&#8221; into a changing forum of &#8220;Craig Stoss is &#8230;&#8221; land. And while &#8220;Craig Stoss is 26 years old, a UoG grad and still drinking too much beer&#8221;, our voyueristic tendencies have taken this even further.</p>
<p>What used to be a daily update or two on Facebook from &#8220;Craig Stoss is sleeping&#8221; to &#8220;Craig Stoss is at work and eating snacks&#8221; to &#8220;Craig Stoss is going out tonight&#8221;, the public demanded Facebook remove the &#8220;is&#8221; and spawned a new concept of our &#8220;Status&#8221; world where at a click I can get a brief summation (and an accurate timestamp of said &#8220;Status&#8221;) of all my Facebook friends. It allowed your &#8220;Status&#8221; to not be tied to you are all. By removing the small &#8216;is&#8217; the freedom was given to type any update you chose. But Facebook had a few problems. 1) it isn&#8217;t an easily visual medium for mobile devices and the Blackberry and iPod apps are still HCI nightmares and 2) logins and security were hindering lay people access to the up-to-minute details they so craved without all that pesky permissions crap getting in the way.</p>
<p>Enter Twitter.</p>
<p>Twitter not only gave us the ability to see <em>anyones</em> realtime &#8220;Statuses&#8221; in chronological order, but now we had an interface that was agnostic to medium. Its vast extensibility all but encouraged and begged developers to find ways to dig deeper into our personal lives, <em>and</em> at the same time make them instant and accurate! Now I can post a photo in real time of the shutter closing. I can provide you with a map accurate within meters of where I am standing and locate others who &#8220;Tweet&#8221; in my vicinity.  And I can follow trends of what people are talking about most and join &#8220;conversations&#8221; with absolute strangers.</p>
<p>Our &#8220;Status&#8221; literally has become the very thing we were doing that instant, not a generic or vague reference to something happening or about to happen, but an actual view to that instant in time.</p>
<p>There is a Vedic language where each word is in itself the make up of the object the word describes. So the word &#8220;tree&#8221; would describe the tree itself. We have now converted this to ourselves: We are no longer a series of long running activities and chapters of our life such as &#8220;I am 21 and attend UoG&#8221; we are now a series of points in time strung together and interleaved with other points in time &#8220;I am 26 and 9 months and am currently in Paderborn Germany at the Best Western room 705&#8243;, or even more granular &#8220;I am taking a crap in said hotel room, it had corn in it&#8221;.</p>
<p>I de-coupled Twitter and Facebook for that reason. In my opinion, and as sure as the sun will shine tomorrow there will be disagreement, Facebook is not a place for granular updating of the milliseconds on my life. It is a more gradual timeline of my growth in various friendships, the travels I have done and the activities I do on a generic scale so that people close and formally close can understand the person I am and am becoming. It has generic references to me being single, my birthdate, my trip to Australia, not specific instances of un-censored details held together via nothing more than the neurons in my brain firing in different patterns when I react to something external to me.  Twitter is just that (for me). A timeline of quick random thoughts I have as my days progress. I minimilize the experience into a phrase of 140 characters, hopefully with a bit of wit and insight to my &#8220;Status&#8221; at that given point In time.</p>
<p>They serve different purposes and will continue to do so until we replace Facebook and Twitter with whatever comes next in the technological journey we are on.</p>
<p>However, all that being said, I have chosen to recouple them as of this week as over the next 4-8 weeks I will on the road extensively and, while I want to maintain a separation of who I am vs. the instant I am experiencing, I feel the two have a MasterCard style Venn diagram when remote from the comfort of my home and work laptops.  So, please excuse the amount of updates, but also enjoy the ride! I hope to bring you plenty of updates via Twitter/Facebook from India, Germany, Switzerland, the US and wherever else I am taken  and hopefully will have some chance to blog a bit along the way! I am a bit geeky after all <img src='http://stoss.ca/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/the-re-linking/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Significant Insignificances</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/significant-insignificances</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/significant-insignificances#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>What do a typewriter and Germany have to do with Twitter?</p> <p>In fact quite a bit, but let&#8217;s step back for a second. How many times have you felt like you were wasting time? Seemed like you were doing something insignificant? Your actions have no relevance to your future goals?</p> <p>In this season on &#8220;How [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do a typewriter and Germany have to do with Twitter?</p>
<p>In fact quite a bit, but let&#8217;s step back for a second. How many times have you felt like you were wasting time? Seemed like you were doing something insignificant? Your actions have no relevance to your future goals?</p>
<p>In this season on &#8220;How I Met Your Mother&#8221; there have been a few reflections of this sort. For instance &#8220;What would have happened had I taken that cab?&#8221; or &#8220;What would have changed had I not been on that street corner at that time?&#8221;.  The point that these statements make is quite simply that life is not a series of achievements or milestones, it is a series of interlocked microseconds where the affect of the previous billions and trillions are placed on the next infinitesimal.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t believe me? Think about something fairly significant in your life. Today is my 4th anniversary with the company I work for. But how did I ever get this job? I heard about my company through a guest speaker in a course at UoG, i was introduced by the professor who I had known from a previous course, I only took that previous course because I had a choice of 2 electives and I had several friends in that course, I had made those friends from living in South Residence. In theory I could even pull this back farther as to why did I chose UoG, or Computer Science for that matter and that takes me back until the age of about 12, probably further. So an action that at the time may have been considered insignificant has resulted in me working for a company where I travel the world, get paid to do something I enjoy and work with a fantastic group of people. Some may say I am stretching it, but am I?</p>
<p>About 3 winters ago I had taken a day off of work to do some errands, Christmas shopping, and a few things for the fam. I woke up a little later than normal and went to have breakfast, out of milk for cereal I made eggs. i showered dressed and went down to my car. I got all the way down to my car and realized I forgot my phone, so I went back up. As I came out of my parking lot, as I was used to doing for work I turned left. About a city block went by before I realized I should have turned right, I started looking for a place to turn around when a police officer pulled in behind me and politely gave me a speeding ticket. Other than the obvious fact that the real blame is on me speeding&#8230;  Can I blame the meeting of me and this officer on me taking the longer time to make eggs than a simple bowl of cereal? The reason the milk was empty escapes me now, as at the time it was an insignificant detail. What about forgetting my cellphone? That added time to my delay? Couldn&#8217;t my vacation day have been on a different day?  <em>Why was I at that intersection at that time on that day?<br />
</em></p>
<p>Twitter was limited to 140 characters for the highly publicized reason that SMS Text messaging standards is 160 characters, and Twitter allows 20 letters for a username. But why are text messages 160 characters? In the mid 80s a communications researcher working on a project to replace the pager sat at a typewriter and typed several common sentences he would have used his new gadget for. He found that almost all those sentences where less than 160 characters. He deemed that sufficient. When cellphones adopted this, bandwidth was slow and very tight, so they stuck with this to reduce overhead, and now that bandwidth is relatively cheap and plentiful we still use a non-scientific 80s limitation in a highly capable technology.</p>
<p>So when professors say that that the text message is ruining the way kids speak, perhaps we should blame that German researcher and his typewriter? Or we should blame the guy who hired him to research, or perhaps we should blame some other seemingly insignificant action that happened well before the 80s?</p>
<p>The problem is that this is all hindsight, who could know that me being stranded in a pub one evening would lead to me befriending a person who 2 years later is taking a trip with me to India? Who knew that by casually mentioning to my former boss I like to travel it would result in a series of events that moved me to England for 2.5+ years and counting?</p>
<p>I can think of so many examples in my life.  Most I cannot even trace back because the moments were so fleeting, but realizing this just gives another reason why you need to go with the flow of life, don&#8217;t try and control everything, don&#8217;t fret about spilling a coffee or tripping on a sidewalk because who knows: That action may lead you closer to your dreams.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/significant-insignificances/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Social Networking Discussion (part 1)</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-social-networking-discussion-part-1</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-social-networking-discussion-part-1#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 19:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Preface:</p> <p>Lately a phenomenon has taken off like many of the fads of the 80s we all love so much. Starting with the BBS systems in the late 70s and through the 90s we have had this intrinsic need to network with people at any distance via computer. With the web becoming more accessible, network [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Preface</span>:</p>
<p>Lately a phenomenon has taken off like many of the fads of the 80s we all love so much. Starting with the BBS systems in the late 70s and through the 90s we have had this intrinsic need to network with people at any distance via computer. With the web becoming more accessible, network speeds getting faster and the advent of many advanced web technologies we have seen phases like Classmates.com, Bebo, MySpace, Facebook and we are now looking at Twitter and the even weirder Omegle where you can (advantageously?) talk to a total stranger.</p>
<p>An ongoing trend throughout this advancement has been the Blog. Starting as Usenet threads and advancing to Weblogs and containing everything from political updates to fart counters, there has never been an outlet for expression that has been utilized by so many people. Useful or not, they are a social medium that won&#8217;t soon disappear.</p>
<p>Now, I am the very first to admit that many of these are time wasters and marketing gimmicks. I am also the first to admit that many people live too much of their lives collecting MySpace friends and looking up old highschool classmates that they would never speak to in any other capacity. And finally I will admit that there are heinous and illegal uses for each of these technologies. BUT, and let me be very clear on this, that doesn&#8217;t mean that they do not have a place in the social paradigm that any individual wishes to maintain.</p>
<p>And this brings me to my Easter weekend trip to a bookstore to find something to enjoy on my upcoming slew of flights. In my search for Malcolm Gladwell&#8217;s new <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1239910943&amp;sr=8-1">Outliers</a>, I found a fluorescent orange cover with the caption &#8220;<em>how blogs, MySpace, YouTube, and the rest of today&#8217;s user-generated media are destroying our economy, our culture, and our values</em>&#8220;. What a strong statement that is. Not only grouping together the 60+ million blogs as 1 entity, but comparing them to the pre-teen obsession that is MySpace and the completely different medium that YouTube boasts. Immediately Andrew Keen had grabbed my interest, as I am sure he intended to, and I decided that &#8220;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cult-Amateur-MySpace-user-generated-destroying/dp/0385520816/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1239910990&amp;sr=8-1">the cult of the amateur</a>&#8221; was a book I needed to read.</p>
<p>Now, I like to think I have an open mind. I enjoy a debate, and am always willing to try and understand why people have a certain point of view, regardless if I agree with it. And in fact Mr. Keen even reminds his readers to keep an open mind as he has been described in various media as everything from &#8220;The Anti-Christ of Silicon Valley&#8221;  to &#8220;The Martin Luther King of the Internet counterreformation&#8221;.  <span>Intrigued yet?</span></p>
<p>You will notice I have labeled this post as &#8216;part 1&#8242;, I have done so for the following reason: Never in my adult life have I ever put down a non-fiction book before reading it through. I am currently on page 45, half way through the 2nd chapter and have already considered doing so. This man takes generalizations and blatantly false information and is trying to sell them as the demise of society. Since I do not want to break my streak, I vow to read this book and write about any interesting subjects I can find, positive or negative I will try and form an objective opinion to post here. Today it is mostly negative&#8230;</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Forward to Chapter 1</span>:</p>
<p>Mr. Keen continually refers to all blogists as monkeys and relates blog entries/writers to &#8220;T. H. Huxley&#8217;s infinite monkey theorem&#8221;. (The theory that &#8220;If you give an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters they will eventually write a &#8216;Great American novel&#8217;&#8221;) Aside from the fact that it has been proven that Huxley did not come up with this phrase at all, blogists are in no way random and their intent is not to come up with the &#8216;Great American Novel&#8217;. Blogging is a medium to project thoughts, express opinions, dabble with poetry/art, offload stress, among <em>many </em>other things, but not on that list is any intent to write a piece of work that will be recognized by a publisher, let alone compete with Shakespeare or Fitzgerald.</p>
<p>He then goes on a rant about Wikipedia and how with no editors, no reporters and no expertise in reporting necessary to join: (I am quoting this as it is so preposterous)</p>
<blockquote><p>It&#8217;s the blind leading the blind &#8211; infinite monkeys providing infinite information for infinite readers, perpetuating the cycle of misinformation and ignorance.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>What?!</strong> Firstly, it is not the intent of Wikipedia to educate. Wikipedia is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About">very clear</a> that it is edited by anyone and no credentials are necessary. If people are misusing Wikipedia for education instead of entertainment that isn&#8217;t the fault of Wikipedia or a cause of social breakdown. In fact it is the exact opposite! Social breakdown is causing people to mistake entertainment for news. This has nothing to do with Wikipedia! Our education system has taught laziness and hasn&#8217;t updated to the new age we are in. Education has to change to support the media available. Like in my Economics class using the Internet to gather real time statistical data about the world stock markets to learn real world examples of market trends as opposed to using Wikipedia to find vague averages, or Google to find Forbes&#8217; lists.</p>
<p>Mr. Keen also claims that every post on Craigslist for free is taking away paid jobs at newspapers and that every Wikipedia reader is taking away money from Brittania&#8230; Again, setting aside that I am sure most local papers won&#8217;t post a request for a hot MMF ass orgy, and Encyclopedia Brittania contains no episode guide list for Futurama, I guess my small and simple point is that the <em>audiences aren&#8217;t the same</em>! I am sure the Venn Diagram looks like the MasterCard logo, but the overlap is not significant enough to impact large organizations like New York Times or Grolier! The decline in the circulation of newspapers and the sale of encyclopedias is attributed to the fact that people don&#8217;t read the morning newspaper, and don&#8217;t want a bookshelf of facts from A-Z that has the weight of a locomotive! Say what you will about the fact that people work 20 hours a day, check their Blackberries non-stop and require up-to-the-second news sent via txt msg, it is where we are. Adapt to it! Utilize the technology that is here to stay, don&#8217;t complain that it is stealing from you. Yes, video killed the radio star, and DVD bitch slapped VHS, no one at Sony yelled about technology changing, they made a different product! And comedians, musicians, newsmakers are more popular and wealthy then they were!</p>
<p>So, did you make it through that? I apologize for the long entry.  I am sorry that I am destroying our economy, culture and values, but as long as I continue to read this book I will do my best to keep that destruction down to the minimum&#8230; oh and yes, I get the irony that I am reviewing a book whose thesis is anti-blog in a blog&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-social-networking-discussion-part-1/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A bright idea!</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-bright-idea</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-bright-idea#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cynical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ideas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Success]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=116</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes I get to work before anyone else, not because I am overly keen, but I live an 8 minute walk away&#8230; Pretty hard to blame traffic.</p> <p>When I do this I do not turn on the 57 fluorescent lights that line our ceiling so I can sit at my desk in the very back [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes I get to work before anyone else, not because I am overly keen, but I live an 8 minute walk away&#8230; Pretty hard to blame traffic.</p>
<p>When I do this I do not turn on the 57 fluorescent lights that line our ceiling so I can sit at my desk in the very back of the office and work. The morning sun is usually enough light for me to find my seat and turn on my computer.</p>
<p>I have been doing this for 3 years and yet my coworkers are constantly surprised that I am sitting in the dark! Is it such a novelty for me to not want to bombard my eyes with blue-tinged, glowing chemicals at 8:30am?</p>
<p>On this note of turning lights off, recently &#8220;<a title="Earth Hour" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Hour">Earth Hour</a>&#8221; seems to be deemed, by the media at least, a success. But really&#8230; Was this event really a success?</p>
<p>I was in a meeting the same day as Earth Hour occurred. We came into the room turned out the lights so that we could view the projector and held the entirety of the meeting in the darkened room. When the meeting was done, we got up to leave and the host of the meeting turned the room lights back on and closed the door to the now empty room. Why? What is our obsession with having everything lit up to its fullest potential?  I walk through cities at night and see rows of 50+ story buildings with every floor brightly shining into the night! Even if there <em>is</em> some one on <em>every </em>floor, is it necessary that <em>every single</em> light be on? The linked Wiki page says the TO saw a 15% decrease in electricity consumption during that hour. Now I am no expert on energy, but if all I had to do to decrease consumption by 15% was shut a light switch off for one hour, and energy is a big concern for me, can&#8217;t this be done <em>every night of the year</em>?!</p>
<p>As my former roommates know I do tend to prefer darkness, probably my inner geek coming out, but I don&#8217;t think it is this preference that makes me think that Earth <strong>Hour</strong> (note the highlight)<strong> </strong>is a ridiculous concept. It is the fact that turning off a light when a room is empty is common sense that makes me come to this conclusion! All throughout Europe they have sensors that turn off hallways lights in hotels and business when empty, and turn on lights as soon as doors open. Even our office building in England has that, and we are a small building. These are <em>not </em>expensive tools, and according to Earth Hour, can save 10s to 100s of MWs every hour!</p>
<p>Regardless, you have to admit that organizing a global project to save sporadic amounts of energy for <strong>one hour </strong>in 88 out of 195 countries is not an efficient way to tackle this problem. Declared success or not, the real problem Earth Hour was trying to address wasn&#8217;t even scratched. How can you make the smallest dent in a problem by changing your behaviour 0.01% of the time (1 hour out of an entire year). Let&#8217;s put it this way: I want to lose weight using exercise. Using the Earth Hour Methodology® I only need to exercise 1.15 minutes in a week.  Sounds good to me, but how many health experts would advocate that as a solution?</p>
<p>Look, I am not an environmentalist. I try to apply common sense to my daily life. Don&#8217;t throw wrappers on the ground, reuse shopping bags, use reusable containers for leftovers etc.  So before the environmentalists say I am dismissing the effectiveness of the awareness Earth Hour spread, all I am saying is: Take all the effort you put into Earth Hour; The viral Tweets and Facebook groups, the banners, the government lobbying and put that towards a longer term solution and the Earth would benefit more.</p>
<p>BTW: This is all assuming that the Earth benefits from this&#8230; But that is another blog entry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/a-bright-idea/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>140 characters&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/140-characters</link>
		<comments>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/140-characters#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:19:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stoss</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[deep thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Observation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoss.ca/wp/?p=53</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I am a bit of a geek. I like technology and I like understanding the various uses of that technology. I have spent the last month or so reading every news article I can about a new (I won&#8217;t say newest, because as we all know in this industry &#8220;newest&#8221; is outdated within minutes) phenomenon: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a bit of a geek. I like technology and I like understanding the various uses of that technology. I have spent the last month or so reading every news article I can about a new (I won&#8217;t say newest, because as we all know in this industry &#8220;newest&#8221; is outdated within minutes) phenomenon: Twitter.</p>
<p>I signed up for an <a title="Follow my Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/stossystoss">account</a> after some prodding from other fellow geeks and went on my way exploring my life 140 characters at a time. What I found out quite quickly is: My life in 140 characters is quite boring. I don&#8217;t mean to say I lead a boring life, in fact I argue far from it, but my thoughts and experiences as a whole are not sum-up-able in such arbitrarily small space (I mean even a txt message has 165 characters).</p>
<p><a title="Follow Stephen Fry's Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/stephenfry">Stephen Fry</a>, the &#8220;UK poster boy&#8221; for Twitter, tweets non-stop from what airport he is in, to what he had for lunch, to the amazing sunset he sees in Singapore. Now don&#8217;t get me wrong I am a huge fan of Stephen Fry. His brilliant comedy and sharp wit is some of the best the UK has to offer. (Watch <a title="QI" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380136/">QI</a> for an excellent display) But I don&#8217;t really need to know about every little thing he does, especially since: a) I will never meet him to discuss those thoughts and  b) I appreciate him because of his comedy based on his life experiences, not his life experiences themselves.</p>
<p>Then I stumbled across <a title="Follow cwalken's Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/cwalken">Christopher Walken</a>. How, here is a Twitter-er that actually is funny and only posted when something is necessary. Only one problem: It <a href="http://www.thewrap.com/ind-column/2057"><em>isn&#8217;t</em></a> Christopher Walken!</p>
<p>This started my brain in motion. This is the Internet, and as is too often the case the hot blonde 19 year old you are hitting on is a fat 45 year old Star Trek fan trying to make it big in the &#8220;Dear Penthouse&#8221; letter writing business. <em>Nothing </em>on the web is real. This blog isn&#8217;t real, it is a series of 1s and 0s cleverly placed to form something we can read. You don&#8217;t really have proof that the Stoss you know and love (well&#8230;know and put up with) is writing this article. In fact you have no idea where this article is even stored! Truth be told, I am writing it and I have no idea where it is stored. I pay an amount of money to people to let me use a computer and tie that space to a memorable mnemonic. (Fellow geeks will recall the original <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CompuServe#User_IDs_and_e-mail_addresses">CompuServ</a> who thought that complex number letter combination would be memorable, yeah, not so much.)</p>
<p>To some extent, aren&#8217;t we all a bit thinner, a bit more built, a bit smarter and a bit more popular on the web? Think about your Facebook, do you post the 3am picture of you stumbling drunk down a back alley to piss, or do you post the one that has perfect lighting and shows a great smile with you giving the shocker to thin air? We form an online persona to escape reality and befriend people we haven&#8217;t spoken to in 15 years just for the ability to brag that we have more than 500 hundred &#8220;friends&#8221;.</p>
<p>We don&#8217;t show our real selves on the net for the same reason we dress a bit nicer at work, or for the theatre, or when we go out to a club: We want people we don&#8217;t know to see us the way we want to be seen, not the way we actually are. We spend all this time in public school being told &#8220;be yourself&#8221; when the truth is, in ever y area of our lives we are someone different. This is actually an area discussed in <a href="http://www.gladwell.com/tippingpoint/index.html">The Tipping Point</a> a fantastic book that in one chapter discusses how our personalities are situational and mutable, not constant. You could even extend this theory to divorce, work problems etc. When the situations change, your mutate your personality, unknowingly and change the former perception of you to other parties.</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t going to change, and in fact I don&#8217;t want it to change. I enjoy being my-multiple-selves and I enjoy each wake of life as much as I can, but I am also aware that &#8220;I&#8221; is not a singular word. So enjoy your life, use Twitter and Facebook and MySpace, but don&#8217;t be fooled into believing you are that person. You are who you are, not what people read about you.</p>
<hr />Editor&#8217;s Note: cwalken, whose twitter page I mention in the post above has now been asked by Twitter to be changed to explicitly state that he is not Affiliated with the real Christopher Walken.</p>
<hr />Second Editor&#8217;s Note: Twitter has now <a href="http://crabbygolightly.com/mt/2009/03/cwalken_is_dead_msey_along_now.html">removed the page</a> and the ghost writer has come forward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stoss.ca/wp/2009/140-characters/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

