An Internet safety study (PDF)  just released by Cox Communications shows that teens may be a bit more safety conscious than previously thought.

The survey, which was done by Harris Interactive, asked 655 13 to 18 year olds about their online and cell phone behavior, specifically addressing issues of cyberbullying and sexting.  The study was in partnership with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children and America’s Most Wanted Host, John Walsh.

For the purposes of the study, cyberbullying was defined as “harassment, embarrassment or threats online or by text message” while sexting referred to “sending sexually suggestive text or emails with nude or nearly-nude photos.”

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of teens (72%) have a social networking profile while 73% use cell phones and 91% have an email address. 

What  they “know” vs. what they do

The study raises an interesting contradiction. 59% of the teens say that posting personal information or photos on public blogs or social networking sites is either “somewhat unsafe” or “very unsafe.” Only 7% say it’s “very safe” while 34% say it’s “somewhat safe.” Yet,when asked about their own behavior, 62% of the kids post photos of themselves, 50% share their real age, 45% the name of their school and 41% the city where they live. When it comes to more private information, only 4% post their address, 9% “places where you typically go” and 14% post their cell phone number.

The study’s executive summary explains, “Though they are aware of the risks, many teens expose personal information about themselves online anyway.”

That revelation appears alarming but after looking at other research about teen online risk, I actually find it very reassuring.

What kids say they “know” about online risks appears to be just parroting back what adults have been telling them for years.  But when you look the real risk factors, their behavior isn’t nearly as dangerous as even they say they think it is.

An in-depth and academically rigorous 2005 study from the University of New Hampshire’s Crimes Against Children Research Center found that posting personal information online does not, by itself, correlate with risk.  As all of the studies show, millions of kids engage in this practice and very few encounter any serious problem as a result.  Let’s face it, the whole premise behind sites like Facebook and MySpace is to share that type of information and despite some of the hysteria, there have been very few reported problems of young people being victimized  as a result of them putting this type of information online.

Of course, nothing – including attending school – is 100% safe but the 34% who said that posting personal information online is “somewhat safe” are getting it right.

Cyberbullying and sexting numbers not as bad as thought

The cyberbullying numbers are also quite reassuring, especially when you compare them to some earlier studies.

The summary points out that “Cyberbullying is widespread among today’s teens, with over one-third having experienced it, engaged in it, or know of friends who have who have done either.” But that one-third is cumulative of bullies, people who have been bullied and even people who know someone who’s been bullied. 

The survey found that approximately 19% of teens say they’ve been cyberbullied online or via text message and that 10% say they’ve cyberbullied someone else.  The largest group, 27% say they have  “seen or heard of a friend who was bullied” online and while 16% say they’ve “seen or heard of a friend who’s bullied others online or by cell phone. 

Of course any amount of bullying is unacceptable but the numbers from this survey are lower than several previous studies.

There is also good news about sexting.  The most widely quoted study on sexting from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reported (pdf)  that 20% of teens “say they have sent/posted nude or semi-nude pictures or video of themselves.”  But the data from the Cox survey showed that while 20% of teens “have engaged in sexting”  that number, too, is cumulative. Only 9% “sent a sext” while 17% received one and 3% forwarded a “sext.”   Again, that 9% number is too high but it’s less than half the 20% figure commonly used.  And 90% of the kids who sent sexts said that nothing bad happened, even though 74% of the kids agreed that sexting is “wrong.” 23% felt that it’s OK if both parties are OK with it and only 3% said “there is nothing wrong with it.”

This survey, said Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use Executive Director, Nancy Willard, “clearly demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of young people have not engaged in risk-taking online behavior or been harmed online. Also, it appears that teens are sensitive to the potentially damaging implications of the material they post online.

The results of a survey showing that 35 percent of middle school and high school students with cell phones have used them to cheat at school is indeed alarming. And perhaps more alarming is the finding that nearly a quarter of the students don’t even think it’s cheating.

Cheating is cheating regardless of whether you use technology or old-fashioned paper notes. I’m appalled that kids may be using technlogy to cheat in school but I’m just as appalled at how schools are cheating kids when it comes to technology.

But in addition to admonishing kids about why it’s wrong to cheat, perhaps it’s also time to rethink what it means to evaluate students in the age of the Internet and omnipresent mobile devices.

The survey, which was conducted by Benenson Strategy Group for Common Sense Media, found that “41 percent (of seventh- to 12th-graders) say that storing notes on a cell phone to access during tests is cheating and a serious offense, while 23 percent don’t think it’s cheating at all.” Similarly, 45 percent say “texting friends about answers during a test” is cheating, while 20 percent do not consider it cheating. Over a third (36 percent) said that downloading a paper from the Internet to turn in was not a serious cheating offense and nearly one-fifth didn’t consider it to be cheating at all.

As a parent and former educator, I am strongly opposed to any type of cheating. And there is no way that anyone — not just students — should get away with claiming authorship on a paper they didn’t write. But this survey might also present an opportunity for educators to re-evaluate the type of tests they’re giving. I think there is a role for tests that measure a student’s ability to quickly acquire and interpret information through mobile devices, even if they know nothing about the subject prior to sitting down for the test.

I’m not making a universal declaration that every kid should be issued an iPhone or iPod touch to help them with every test they take. But I do think that the emergence of cheap mobile technology and — eventually — omnipresent connectivity offer educators an opportunity to incorporate the technology into their classrooms and even testing.

As Peggy Sheehy, a library media specialist from Suffern, N.Y. put it: “We can’t teach 21st century literacy and assess with 19th century methodology. We have to look at what we really need students to be able to do when they leave us” and we must ask, “what is my student learning outside of school and how can I get them just as engaged?”

Right now, it’s a valid point to say that letting kids access mobile devices may discriminate against those who can’t afford the phones or the service. Yet that will change, just as it did with electronic calculators, as these devices become even more affordable, especially if students can access free wireless networks at school.

In the work force, what’s important in most situations is not so much the facts you can pull out of your head but your ability to acquire information when you need it and — most importantly — your ability to make sense of it.

I’m not saying being able to recall facts from memory is never important. I have to do that nearly every day when I go on live radio. And I often use the Internet to acquire facts only moments before the broadcast and have occasionally had to look up a fact while taking on live radio. What’s most important is not my regurgitation of the facts, but my interpretation. The ability to put things into context is hard to measure with the types of multiple choice tests that are commonly used in schools.

Of course, the ability to use a search engine is no substitute for kids learning how to critically evaluate the information they do acquire. Knowing how to judge the authority of a source and being able to interpret the meaning of information — in the long run — is more important than the ability to remember it.

A few years ago I participated in a conference with educators from the U.S. and Japan. Both groups had their gripes about their country’s educational system, but what I heard from several of my Japanese colleagues was the concern that their system concentrated too much on rote memory and not enough on creativity and critical thinking. David Ricky Matsumoto, author of “The New Japan,” said the same thing those educators told me: “In my experience,” he wrote in the book, “the typical Japanese student excels at learning facts and figures. “… What many Japanese students lack is the ability to think about problems creatively, critically, and autonomously.”

So, while we should continue to discourage cheating of any kind, we should also encourage schools to find creative ways to use technology, including cell phones, in the learning process and in the testing process. It’s called adaptation. And besides, progress should always be a part of a progressive educational system.

This post is adapted from a column that appeared in the San Jose Mercury News

By Larry Magid

I picked up my iPhone 3G S at the Palo Alto store early on launch day, Friday morning, and after several hours of testing, I’m impressed so far.  Not only did I find it a lot faster than the 3G for loading applications, I also quickly came to appreciate its new video capabilities and its voice control.

The new phone looks virtually identical to its predecessor. And, since Apple just issued a free update of the iPhone operating system for previous iPhones, many of the new features are also available on first and second generation iPhones and even the iPod Touch (iPod Touch users will have to pay $10 for the software).  But there are some things you only get with the new hardware.

For example, with the 3G S and the older 3G side by side, I launched several applications. AOL Radio, Facebook and Safari all loaded about twice as fast on the 3G S.  There is technology in the new phone that will use AT&T’s faster HSPA 7.2 megabit data network but that network isn’t yet available. Nevertheless, I still found web surfing in Safari to be noticeably faster on the new phone compared to the 3G connected to the same WiFi or cellular network, presumably because of the new phone’s faster processor.

You can talk to it

I wasn’t sure I’d like it, but I’m falling in love with the Voice Control feature in the new phone.  To call someone in your contact list you simply hold down the home button and say “Call Dave Smith” (or whomever).  If Dave has multiple phone numbers a voice will ask you if you wish to call home, office, mobile, etc.  You can also use this to dial a number by simply saying “Dial 555-1212” and it will dial for you.  Without even having to click the iPod icon, the feature can also be used to “play songs by” play “next” or “previous” song, turn on shuffle  or play  particular playlist.  When in the main screen I said “shuffle” and the phone told me that “no music is playing, do you want to play music now.” When I said “yes” the music started. Available commands are displayed on the screen when you’re using Voice Control.

Improved Camera

One of the most heralded new features is the improved camera. It’s been upgraded to 3 megapixels and now has autofocus.  If you touch the screen a rectangle shows the focus area.  Most important – the 3G S can now take video which you can easily email or upload to YouTube.  The video is standard definition — not high def – but you can shoot either in portrait or widescreen landscape mode.  Once you’ve completed your shoot, you can trim the beginning and the ending. That’s not exactly sophisticated video editing but it’s very useful.  You can then send the video as an email or upload it directly to your YouTube account.

My first video won’t win any academy awards but you can see the 43 second clip I shot from the Apple store below.  Unfortunately, I shot this before learning that you can get better results holding the phone in landscape mode.  If you scroll down you’ll see my second video which was in landscape mode.

A sense of direction

At first I wondered why anyone other than a hiker would care about the iPhone’s new compass until I tried pressing the compass button within Google maps and noticed that it orients you based on the direction you’re moving. I’m sure other application developers will also find a way to use this feature.

What all current iPhone users get with iPhone OS 3

As I said earlier, some of the features on the new phone are also available on older iPhones with the free OS 3 upgrade.  These include (finally) the ability to copy, cut and paste, a wider landscape keyboard in mail, messages, notes and Satari and the ability to search across the phone for contacts, mail, calendars, notes and iPod content.  There is a also a nifty new Voice Memo application that – like the video app — lets you trim the beginning and ending of your audio.  Although it’s not positioned as a professional tool, I found the quality good enough to use for radio clips.

Worthwhile upgrade?

Clearly the iPhone 3G S is a worthwhile upgrade but, if you’re already an iPhone user, it’s hard to say whether the extra speed and new features are worth the extra price, especially if you’re in the middle of your AT&T contract and have to pay a premium over the standard $199 for the 16 GB model or $299 for the 32 GB version.  And, now that the older 8 GB  iPhone 3G has been reduced to $99, some people might want to buy that inflation friendly model which has many of the same features at a more affordable price.   Still, compared to the competition – including Palm’s new Pre – the iPhone 3 GS is a good value and a very innovative product.

And here’s the second video I shot with the iPhone 3G S. It’s an interview with Shervin Pishevar of SGN who developed a new online piloting game for the new iPhone operating system.

This post was adapted from an article that appaered on InternetNews.com

The Internet and the way young people use technology are constantly evolving, but the safety messages change very slowly, if at all.

Like technology itself, Internet safety has to evolve. Back in 1994, when I wrote the first widely disseminated Internet safety publication, I advised parents not to let kids put personal information or photos online and — because of what turned out to be an exaggerated fear of predators — I urged them to avoid online conversations with strangers. Back then, along with trying to keep kids away from porn, Internet safety was mostly about protecting children from dangerous adults.

But starting around 2005, a new phase of the Web — often referred to as “Web 2.0″ — prompted some Internet safety advocates to focus on ways kids could get in trouble for what they post on social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook. It was in that year that Anne Collier and I founded BlogSafety.org (later renamed ConnnectSafely.org) so we could provide a forum for discussing safety issues on the Web. It was also around that time that politicians and the media, especially the TV show “To Catch a Predator,” started whipping up fears of predators trolling the Web for vulnerable children.

But after carefully reviewing available research, statistics show that the likelihood of a young person being harmed by an online stranger is quite rare, and sexual solicitations and harassment are most often from peers. And to the extent it has occurred, it affects teens, not young children. Based on studies by the Crimes Against Children Research Center, the overwhelming majority of crimes against youths continue to take place in the “real world,” mostly by adults known to the child.

But that doesn’t mean that the Internet is a risk-free zone. It’s just that young people are far more likely to be harmed by other youth or the consequences of their own online behavior than by adult criminals.

Their interactions are largely with people they know from the real world. As danah boyd (she prefers a lower case d & b) observed in her doctoral dissertation, Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics (PDF), “teen participation in social network sites is driven by their desire to socialize with peers. Their participation online is rarely divorced from offline peer culture; teens craft digital self-expressions for known audiences and they socialize almost exclusively with people they know.”

This understanding of youth risk led to a whole new phase of Internet safety education focusing on such things as cyberbullying and urging youth to avoid posting material that could be embarrassing or get them into trouble with authorities and potential future employers. Recently, the focus has turned to the emotional and legal consequences of “sexting,” — kids sending nude pictures of themselves via cell phones or the Web. But Anne Collier observed in NetFamilyNews.org, we run the risk of “technopanics” over sexting and bullying.

What we’ve learned from observing how kids use the Net, mobile phones, gaming devices and other interactive technology is that there is really no distinction between online and offline behaviors. Technology is woven into their lives. They don’t go online, they ARE online. So it’s really about youth safety — not Internet safety.

It’s about helping young people make wise choices not just in how they use technology but in how they live their lives. Internet safety is more than just the absence of danger. It also includes finding ways to use technology for learning, collaboration, community building, political activism, self-help and reaching out to others.

These are not just philosophical arguments. They’re pragmatic because preaching about safety or trying lock down the Internet doesn’t protect kid. Trying to instill fear — especially based on myths — actually increases danger because it causes kids to tune out good advice.

Sure, there are technologies that can keep kids from using social networking services or visiting inappropriate Web sites. But, like fences around swimming pools, the use of filters at home and school can’t protect them forever. That’s why we teach kids to swim. Not only does knowing how to swim help prevent drowning, it empowers them to thrive in the water instead of fearing it. The same is true with technology. As kids mature into teens, we must pull back on the technological controls in favor of self-control.

In an email interview,  Dr. Larry Rosen, Professor of Psychology at California State University, Dominguez Hills and author of Me, MySpace and I: Parenting the Net Generation observed, “sadly, too many parents think that using technology to track their children’s keystrokes or restrict access to certain websites is sufficient parenting.  It is not.  Parents must be involved with their children’s virtual lifestyles developing trust, being aware of any potential problems, learning about the technologies they use, and communicating often.”

There’s great news and not-so-great news when it comes to smart-phones. On June 6, Palm released its $199 Pre — a worthy competitor to Apple’s iPhone. Two days later, Apple announced its faster and better iPhone 3G S starting at $199, and slashed the starting price of its current iPhone 3G to $99.

The bean counters at Apple’s many competitors are no doubt working their spreadsheets trying to figure out how they can reprice their products to compete. But if you shop around, you can already find various models of the BlackBerry, Samsung BlackJack and other smart-phones for as little as $49 — or even free — with a two-year service contract.

So, is there any reason we shouldn’t all jump for joy in celebration of this grand new age of cheap and super-powerful phones? You bet there is. Smart-phones may be cheap to buy, but they’re not cheap to use.

Like those adjustable mortgages that got so many people into trouble, smart-phones are easy on the budget to acquire but major financial sinkholes over time.

The real cost of a cellular device has never been what you pay for the hardware but what you pay to use it on a monthly basis. Like King Camp Gillette, who popularized the safety razor, the cell phone industry long ago figured out there is profit in “giving away the razor and selling the blades.” That’s been true for years, but with smart-phones it’s even more true because of data and text-messaging plans.

That $99 iPhone will cost you a minimum of $70 a month to use, but probably a lot more.The cheapest voice plan is $40 a month for 450 minutes. But if you use your phone the way most people do, you’ll probably need to spend $60 for 900 minutes, $80 for 1,350 minutes or maybe even $100 for unlimited nationwide calling. You’ll also pay $30 a month for the mandatory data plan whether you want it or not.

So now your bill is somewhere from $70 to $130. But wait — you still have to pay for text messages.

Without a special plan, outgoing and incoming text messages cost 20 cents each. So if you’re going to send or receive text messages, you’ll need to pay $5 a month for up to 200 messages, $15 a month for 1,500 messages or $20 a month for unlimited messages.

According to a recent Nielsen study, the average American teen sends about 2,500 text messages a month in addition to the number they receive. So if the phone is for a teen or an adult who texts like one, there’s no choice but to pay $20 for the unlimited plan.

Do the math and your AT&T bill is somewhere from $90 to $150 a month. And if you’re a heavy user, you had better opt for that higher figure or you might wind up like my poor son, Will.

Fresh out of college, Will bought himself an iPhone earlier this year and was shocked that his first AT&T bill was nearly $200 because he didn’t get the unlimited plan. Once he upgrades to that plan, his annual contribution to AT&T will be $1,800 plus taxes and regulatory fees. That’s a lot more than most American commuters spend for gasoline in a year.

Of course, no one forced him to buy a smart-phone. But given the lifestyle of most young adults, it’s rapidly becoming a necessity. Like a large and growing percentage of his generation, he doesn’t have a land line. And because of his nomadic lifestyle (he’s a musician), he needs to be able to get his e-mail on the fly. To him and many like him, trying to get by without a smart-phone and an unlimited plan would be like living in Los Angeles without a car.

Verizon Wireless pricing plans are roughly equivalent to AT&T’s. Sprint, which provides service for the Pre, some BlackBerrys and other smart-phones, offers a $99 “Simply Everything” plan that covers unlimited voice, data and text.

One of the reasons I hope the Pre does well is to put pressure on AT&T and Verizon to lower their prices. But even Sprint’s relatively good deal costs $1,200 a year, which is more than I paid for my first apartment after college.

One justification for these costs is that there is limited bandwidth for data — and, indeed, iPhone users have been known be heavy users of AT&T’s data network. Another justification is the enormous investment cell phone companies have made for their infrastructure, including the faster “4G” networks that the carriers will roll out over the next few years.

But those new networks will also have much bigger capacity. That could enable companies to lower prices but they may simply take bigger profits.

Intel co-founder Gordon Moore once famously predicted that computing power would roughly double every two years, a prediction that became known as “Moore’s Law.” After watching my phone bills grow over the years, I offer Larry’s Law.

It’s this: The cheaper things are to buy, the more they cost to use.

The smart phone wars have heated up over the past few days with the release of Palm’s new Pre and Apple’s announcements of a new iPhone, a cheaper price for its existing phone and a new operating system for users of all iPhones.

The Palm Pre, which hit stores on Saturday for $199 after rebate (and a two year contract with Sprint) is a very worthy competitor for Apple. Unlike the iPhone it has a physical keyboard which, while a bit small, is quite good. But it also has a touch screen that you can use to launch programs, zoom, shrink or move windows and dial the phone, although there’s no onscreen virtual keyboard for entering text.

One of the things I like best about the Pre is that you can synchronize it over the air. Rather than connect it to a PC or Mac to move over contacts and calendar items, you simply sign in to your existing accounts and it brings over all the data via the Sprint network. It works with Google’s calendar and Gmail, Yahoo and other web-based services as well as for businesses with Microsoft Exchange servers. Apple does this through its $99 a year MobileMe service but Palm does it for free with a variety of services.

Like the iPhone the Pre has a media player for video and music and it does come with a cable to move music and video files from a PC or Mac. But rather than write their own synchronization software, Palm encourages users to synch their media files with Apple’s free iTunes software. When a Pre is connected, iTunes thinks it’s an iPod or iPhone. I’m not sure what Apple’s legal department will have to say about that, but if Palm can get away with it, it makes life easier all around.

I also like the way Palm organizes windows. The device’s Web OS operating system is multi-tasking so you can run several programs at once but to make the most out of the Pre’s small screen, each program runs in a “card” and all the cards become visible when you press the Pre’s physical button below the screen. You then use your finger to flick from card to card and just touch the card you want to make full screen. To close a program you simply flick the card up and away.

You can dial the phone by punching numbers on the onscreen keyboard or typing them from the physical keyboard but you’re more likely to just start typing the name of the person you want to call so the phone can look up and dial the number for you. That’s also the case with the Blackberry, iPhone and most other smart phones.

I like the Pre a lot but I do have a few complaints. It’s a little sluggish – not terrible, but enough so I notice slight delays. And while it’s relatively user-friendly, it’s not as friendly as the iPhone. I find myself having to think about what to do and occasionally having to type “help” to bring up the cheat sheet, whereas with the iPhone I don’t recall having hardly any learning curve other than getting used to the iPhone’s virtual keyboard. Except for typing on the screen (which I’m still not 100% comfortable doing), it just seemed to be obvious right out of the box.

There are some things I like better about the Pre than the iPhone and the opposite is also true so, on balance, if you had to buy a smart phone today, I think the Pre and the iPhone are pretty much neck and neck. But wait – Apple isn’t sitting still. Not only did the company on Monday announce a new iPhone, it also announced free software that will upgrade existing models.

The iPhone 3G S (which I haven’t yet tested) is said to be faster than the existing 3G, have much better battery life and come with a 3 megapixel camera that can also record video. It will come with twice the memory for the same price: $199 for 16 GB and $299 for 32 GB, up from 8 and 16. The Palm Pre comes with jut 8 GB. Also, Apple reduced the starting price of its existing 3G phone to $99.

Apple says that the phone will load applications faster and take advantage of upcoming planned speed improvements in AT&T’s 3G network. Apple also says that the new phone will have better battery life including up to 5 hours of 3G talk time or 12 hours if you’re on the 2G network. The new phone’s 3 megapixel camera will also have autofocus and an automatic macro mode for close-ups. The big news is that it will record video with software that will let you easily send or post the video. Though lacking in the Pre, video is pretty common on phones but the new iPhone lets you edit video from the phone which is very cool.

Catching up with the Pre (and most other smart phones), Apple’s new operating system, which comes out on June 17th, will upgrade all iPhones with cut, copy and paste features.

Simply based on memory configuration, the iPhone hardware is now less expensive than the Pre, but it might cost you more to use it. Sprint has some pretty aggressive pricing, including a $99 “Simply Everything” plan that covers unlimited voice, data and texting. AT&T bas a $99 “Nation Unlimited” plan for voice but you must also pay $30 for the data plan plus an optional $20 for unlimited text messages. Before buying a phone, check out the carriers plans to see what makes sense for your usage patterns.

Unlike the Pre, Blackberry and most other phones, the iPhone doesn’t have a removable battery which is a problem for existing phones that sometimes run out of juice during a single day. If Apple delivers on its promise of better battery life that will be less of an issue but I still like being able to carry extra batteries just in case.

The new iPhone will be available June 19. Expect long lines at Apple and AT&T stores. The Palm Pre is available now. There aren’t long lines at Sprint stores, Best Buy or other retailers, but there are shortages.

WASHINGTON — Last year, Congress passed the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act,which called for yet another committee to study Internet safety. By statute, the Online Safety and Technology Working Group is made up of representatives of the business community, public interest groups and federal agencies. I’m on the committee as co-director of the nonprofit ConnectSafely.org.  ConnectSafely co-director and NetFamilyNews editor Anne Collier serves as co-chairman along with MySpace cheif security officer, Hemanshu Nigam.

The group, which reports to the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration, is totally unfunded. The government wasn’t even able to buy us lunch, let alone plane tickets to Washington. But I’m not complaining. It’s an honor to have even a small role in helping to shape national Internet safety policy.

To be honest, I was a bit skeptical when I first heard about the working group, wondering why we needed yet another committee to look at this topic. In 2000, the “COPA Commission,” created by the Children’s Online Protection Act of 1998, issued a very comprehensive report, and last year I was privileged to serve on the Internet Safety Technical Task Force — created by attorneys general of nearly every state.

The task force issued a report debunking myths about Internet safety, concluding that kids are more at risk from other kids than from so-called Internet predators. That finding was rejected by several of the state attorneys general who received it. South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster said the report’s findings were “as disturbing as they are wrong,” adding that “the conclusions in this report create a troubling false sense of security on the issue of child Internet safety.”

But I think the report was both accurate and insightful. It recognized that Internet safety is too complicated to be reduced to sound bites and sensationalist TV shows, and that most of the kids who get in trouble online also get in trouble offline. The Internet may amplify dangers, but it doesn’t create them.

I’m not aware of any federal Internet safety commissions that met during the Bush administration. From what I can tell, that administration paid very little attention to Internet safety other than to add to the exaggerations and fear-mongering about so-called Internet predators.

So is there any point in taking yet another look at Internet safety? Yes, if only because things have changed dramatically over the past few months. To begin with, we have a new administration led by a president who actually understands the Internet as well as the constitutional issues that arise whenever government tries to control online speech, access or even safety.

When the new working group convened Thursday, our first speaker was Susan Crawford, who works at the White House as special assistant to the president for science, technology and innovation policy. A law professor and founder of OneWebDay, Crawford brings a refreshing understanding of the government’s need to balance safety and security with civil liberties, privacy and even the First Amendment rights of minors.

Her opening remarks helped set the tone for the group by admonishing us to “avoid overheated rhetoric about risks to kids online,” pointing out that “risks kids face online may not be significantly different than the risks they face offline.”

She also reminded us that “the risks are more subtle than the press would have us believe,” and that we need to avoid trying to find “silver bullets” and recommending policy based on “anecdotes.” Finally she pointed out that we need to be careful to avoid “tech mandates.” While the working group will research the efficacy of technology tools to help protect kids, Crawford repeated something that I have been saying for 12 years: “The best software (to protect kids) is between the ears,” not on a device.

The working group will be divided into four subcommittees: child pornography reporting, data retention, protection technology and education. I will chair the education subcommittee and look forward to hearing from companies, educators, nonprofits and anyone else who has ideas about how to educate America’s youth to keep on using the Internet productively and safely. If you have ideas, please feel free to share them.

It’s fashionable these days to refer to Microsoft as a dinosaur whose products and thinking are stuck in the 20th century. The company that was convicted of being an illegal monopoly not all that long ago is today thought of as relatively tame. The momentum these days seems to be with Google, Apple and newcomers such as Facebook and Twitter. But the fact is, Microsoft continues to be a mighty force.

Indeed, based on what I saw at the Wall Street Journal’s D: All Things Digital conference in Carlsbad last week, there is still plenty of tread on Microsoft’s tires.

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was one of the speaker’s at D, where he responded to questions from conference co-host and Wall Street Journal Personal Technology columnist Walt Mossberg. Although upbeat on Microsoft, Ballmer was not optimistic about a quick economic turnaround, saying “to think that things would be back in a year seems naive to me.” He went on to say that it could be a very long recovery and “maybe today is normal and yesterday was a blooper.”

He also said that Microsoft has flattened out its research and development spending. It’s not that it has stopped investing in new products; it’s just that it is no longer continuing to increase the level of spending at a steady rate.

Still, the company has been productive in recent months. For one thing, it’s only a few months away from releasing Windows 7, which Ballmer confirmed should be ready in time for the holidays.

I’ve been testing Windows 7 for months and, based on my experience, it’s the best and most stable operating system Microsoft has ever created. My PC that runs a Windows 7 “release candidate” still occasionally slows down and even crashes but far less often than with Vista or XP.

And the user interface — especially the ability to peer into the windows of running programs by clicking on their icon on the task bar — makes using Windows a lot easier.

But the big news at D was about search. Ballmer officially unveiled the company’s new search engine, which it is calling Bing. Bing.com will go live on June 3, but if you go to the site now, you’ll see a preview video. Before unveiling Bing, Ballmer showed a video about all the different brands that Microsoft has applied to its search efforts, including MSN Search and Live Search. Ballmer thinks that Bing is more likely to resonate with users. “Brand doesn’t substitute for innovation, but innovation doesn’t substitute for a brand consumers can get their mind around,” he said.

It would be a gross exaggeration to call Bing a Google killer, but that’s OK. Google doesn’t have to die for Microsoft to succeed in search. Besides, Ballmer made it very clear that he doesn’t expect Bing to overtake Google in the foreseeable future. Microsoft, if anything, is persistent. It took three tries before Microsoft Word was worthy of becoming the dominant word processing program, and it wasn’t until version 3.0 that Windows began to get serious traction.

To differentiate itself from Google, Bing is not only visually more attractive, it’s also more informative. Functioning as what Microsoft is calling a “decision engine,” rather than simply linking you to sites, Bing searches often end with information directly from Bing. For example, if you type in the name of a city you get local weather, hotel prices and other information without having to click anywhere. And, depending on the content licensing rules of sites that Bing draws from, it can sometimes display content directly — from Wikipedia for example — without the user having to click through. It even has a built-in shopping engine that, when you search for a product, shows you images, offerings from multiple merchants as well as product information, customer reviews and expert reviews.

The search engine also helps you find travel deals and lets you book travel without having to leave the site. I’m not sure how well it works, but it includes a “price predictor” that helps determine if the price of the ticket you’re thinking of buying is likely to go up or down.

Despite Google’s current dominance, search doesn’t have to be a winner-takes-all business. If Microsoft can increase its market share gradually over time, it stands to take in billions in additional revenue. In the meantime, Google isn’t standing still. Just as Ballmer was in Carlsbad talking about Microsoft’s foray into search, Google executives were in San Francisco talking about how they are beefing up their offerings, including some that will compete head-on with Microsoft’s core applications.

The economy may be in a recession, but tech isn’t in a slowdown. Thanks to startups and innovative thinking from big companies like Google and Microsoft, 2009 might be remembered as a banner year for innovation.

ATM and credit card skimming fraud is on the rise.  As you know, the back of your card has a magnetic strip which is scanned either by merchants or by ATM machines to record your account information.  Unfortunately, thieves also have access to those skimmers which can be secretly embedded into ATM machines or used by unscrupulous waiters, store clerks and others that you hand your card to.

One tactic is for a thief to install a skimmer on an ATM machine so that when you think the bank is scanning it, it’s actually being scanned by the crook. These devices can even be installed over the bank’s legitimate slot so as the bank scans your card so does the thief.  A small hidden camera can video your fingers as you type in your PIN.  With the pin and a scanned image of your card, the thief has everything they need to steal your money.  Some of these devices even have hidden cell phones that instantly transmit the account information to the criminals who could be anywhere in the world.

What can you do?

• Examine the ATM machine to make sure there’s nothing attached to the front.  
• Cover your hand as you type in your PIN so that a hidden camera can’t record it. 
• If the ATM pad is stiff or difficult to punch, there is a possibility that a recording device could have been placed on top of it.
• Be aware of who you give your credit cards to.  If a waiter or clerk takes it into a back room, there is the possibility they could skim the card and write down the expiration date and the three or four digit security code on the back or front of the card. That’s all they need to misuse your card.  
• Check your statements carefully but – better yet – get an online banking account and check recent activity on a regular basis.  Transactions are typically posted online in real time or within a couple of days.

————————————————————————————————————–

Check out this video from a local TV station about a clever way theives steal your ATM informatoin

One of the most popular questions asked of cell phone callers is “Where are you?”

Thanks to a new service, you may not have to ask or answer that question. Glympse, which launched on Monday, joins Loopt and Google Latitude as the newest location-based service that uses cell phones’ GPS capability to tell people where you are.

Glympse, which is free, has taken a different approach. Unlike Loopt, which requires the sender and recipient to sign up for service and download an application, Glympse requires almost no effort on the part of the person who is following you. All they have to do is click on a Web link on a computer or a Web- enabled phone to see where you are on a map.

To transmit your location, you need to download an application to your phone and use the application to send a “Glympse,” which authorizes that person to follow you for a specific amount of time and send them the link they need to see you on a map.

Another way it differs from both Loopt and Google Latitude is that Glympse can automatically time out after tracking someone for four hours. The person being followed can also choose a shorter monitoring window, like 30 minutes.

To its credit, Loopt is also permission-based and sends reminders that you may be sharing your real-time information. Google’s Latitude service, which also requires you to give permission to be followed, only displays your approximate location — within about a half mile — but doesn’t show precisely where you are.

With Glympse, you might not know the person’s exact address, but you’ll probably be within a hundred feet.

The coolest thing about Glympse is when you are following someone on the move. You can pinpoint them on the map, see their speed, and see when and where they stop.

I used it to follow Glympse co-founder Bryan Trussle as he rode in a car from my house to San Jose. I saw him get on and off the freeway and pull into a parking lot. At one point I caught his car’s driver exceeding the speed limit by a few miles an hour.

As he compared his actual location to what I saw on my PC, we found there only a slight lag between the two — a difference of 10 seconds on average.

While I realize that some will consider this technology a little creepy, there are practical uses for it.

Some police departments, delivery services and businesses spend a lot of money on equipment to do what Glympse could do for free.

For one thing, it can reassure parents and family members that their loved ones are safe.

I remember how nervous I was when my 16-year-old daughter would use the car or ride in other kids’ cars. We’d insist that she call us when she arrived and made her tell us where she planned to go. If she had a Glympse-equipped cell phone, we could have checked in on her from time to time — and we would have known if she was speeding too.

And rather than calling people to let them know you’re arriving in 15 minutes, they can track you online or on a Web-enabled phone.

The Glympse’s public beta currently works only on the T-Mobile G1, which uses Google’s Android operating system. The company is working on versions for the iPhone, Windows Mobile and BlackBerry.

Disclosure: Glympse, as well as its main competitors, Loopt and Google, are supporters of ConnectSafely.org, a nonprofit Internet safety organization I help operate.