In April, Patti and I went to Malta, Florence and Rome. Here are our videos.
Rome
Florence
Malta
by Larry Magid
I’m starting to worry Google will become the world’s SPOF — that’s short for “single point of failure.” I also worry about the company’s power to determine whether certain other businesses make money.
A SPOF is a component in a system that — if it fails — brings down everything with it. We generally think of a SPOF as a point in a discrete system like a computer or a house. If the CPU or the hard drive in your computer fails, the entire machine is unusable. If the circuit breaker or fuse box in your house goes down, so do all the electrical appliances.
Mission-critical operations try to avoid SPOFs. That’s why commercial airliners always have at least two engines and two or three ways to perform many critical tasks, such as bringing down the landing gear. It’s why radio and TV stations and hospitals have backup power sources and why smart computer users back up their data.
I’m told that Google has plenty of redundancy within its own infrastructure so that, when a server or group of servers goes down, customers aren’t usually inconvenienced. But sometimes — such as happened Thursday — lots of people are affected. On its blog, Google explained that a system glitch caused it to route Web traffic via Asia, causing about 14 percent of users to experience slow services or even interruptions. The outage reportedly affected Google Search, caused Google News to slow to a crawl and created problems with YouTube, Google Maps, Google Docs, Google Reader and Google Analytics.
As you’d expect, a lot of details about the outage came via Twitter, through which people around the world immediately shared their experiences as Google services went down and back up. Twitter’s search term for this particular outage is googlefail.
I wasn’t personally affected by this outage, but as a Gmail and Google Calendar user, I have been unable for brief periods of time to gain access to my messages and schedule. That raises an important question: Is Google too big to fail?
We lately have applied the “too big to fail” argument to banks, automakers and a few other big businesses whose failure would have an enormous economic impact on thousands or millions of people. But when it comes to reach, companies like General Motors, AIG and Citibank are tiny compared with Google, which touches the lives of hundreds of millions of people in every part of the world.
A Google failure — even a temporary one — doesn’t just inconvenience people. It can cost them money. In addition to the potential financial loss and waste of time when businesses and professionals are not able to get e-mail or check their calendar, there is a large cadre of businesses and entrepreneurs that depend on Google advertising revenue.
Any Web site that participates in the Google AdSense program — and there are a lot of them — stands to lose money if Google’s ad servers go down. Businesses that buy ads will lose sales, and the Web sites that carry those ads will temporary lose that advertising revenue.
And it’s not just outages that people worry about. Google has software that ranks Web sites based on their importance. Page rank and other factors determine where a site shows up in a Google search. The higher your site is in the results, the more visitors you’ll get, which — if you’re an e-commerce site — translates into more sales. If you use display advertising, it means more hits and therefore more ad revenue.
The algorithms that determine how a site is ranked are, of course, controlled by Google, and when Google tweaks those algorithms, there are winners and losers.
Google has also been known to punish Web sites for violating its policies. The company has a “webmaster guidelines” page where it outlines “some of the illicit practices that may lead to a site being removed entirely from the Google index or otherwise penalized.” Google says that “if a site has been penalized, it may no longer show up in results on Google.com or on any of Google’s partner sites.”
Being penalized by Google could have a bigger financial impact on a small business than a fine imposed by a court or regulatory body for violating a federal or state law. But our legal system operates with some transparency and offers a chance to confront your accuser and put up a defense. Google does have a place where you can “submit your site for reconsideration,” but that’s not exactly the same level of protection that you would get if you were accused of breaking a real law.
This posting originally appeared in the San Jose Mercury News
In my Mercury News column I explore the dangers of having a single company repsonsible for so many people’s livelihoods.
At a conference in Malta, a group of American bloggers had a bit of a culture clash with some European and Asian journalists.
Read Larry Magid’s report on CNET News.com
Podcast — Larry Magid and CNET’s Executive Editor Tom Merritt talk about the panel
As I reported today on CNET News.com, the Center for Disease Control is using Twitter to advise people about swine flu. And Nielsen Online is reporting a big increase in conversatoins about the disease that has already killed 149 people in Mexico as on noon PT today.
See my CNET post: CDC using Twitter for swine flu information
As we recognize Earth Day this week, it’s worth looking back on last week’s report on the carbon footprint of spam.
In a report commissioned by security vendor McAfee, ICF International found the 62 trillion pieces of spam sent in 2008 had the same environmental impact as 3.1 million passenger cars or 2.4 million U.S. homes. A single piece of junk e-mail adds 0.3 grams of carbon dioxide, which is like driving three feet.
Because they usually don’t waste paper, it’s easy to ignore the environmental impact of spam or any other electronic communications. But sending, receiving, storing and viewing messages does consume energy, and energy consumption adds to carbon emissions in addition to other environmental and economic costs.
The ICF estimates that e-mail from the average business user accounts for 288 pounds of carbon dioxide per year, with 22 percent of that usage related to spam. More than half the energy wasted by spam results from users viewing and deleting it, according to the report.
The process of getting spam from one place to another involves multiple phases — all of which consume energy. First there is the scraping of Web sites to harvest e-mail addresses, followed by code and copy writing to initiate the spam campaign. Next comes sending the messages via the Internet to an army of infected “zombie PCs” all of which use energy to receive and retransmit the messages. Then there is the impact on servers that store and send the spam, the routers and other Internet infrastructure and, of course, the PCs that finally receive and display the junk mail.
Add to that the resources used to attempt to filter the spam and it’s easy to understand the potential environmental impact. If every inbox had spam filters, according to the report, we could cut energy waste by 75 percent. But eliminating spam at the source would save even more energy.
When McColo, a U.S.-based Web-hosting service that was responsible for much of the world’s spam, was shut down in 2008, the result was an annualized carbon dioxide savings equal to taking 2.2 million cars off the road. But the victory was short-lived. Spammers have successfully rebuilt their sending capacity.
The report suggests that, beyond doing everything possible to put spammers out of business, spam filtering is an effective way to reduce the energy waste. Most e-mail programs come with spam filters, though configuring them to trap spam and not to trap legitimate mail isn’t always easy.
There are several plug-ins for Microsoft Outlook and Outlook Express that greatly improve the filtering you can do with those programs. Until I discovered a free and even better solution, my favorite was Cloudmark Desktop, which costs $39.95 a year.
The way I currently eliminate most spam is to route all of my mail through Gmail. When people write to me at larry@larrymagid.com, the mail gets routed to my Gmail account. I then access it either through a Web browser or through Microsoft Outlook, which, like all e-mail programs, can be configured to access Gmail. You’ll also need to configure Gmail to allow you to check mail through an e-mail program.
Gmail isn’t perfect. But it does a better-than-average job at trapping spam and a much-better-than-average job of avoiding false positives. Nevertheless, some spam still gets through and I occasionally find a legitimate message trapped in the spam filter.
Yahoo and Hotmail also have spam filters. I haven’t used Hotmail in a while but I find that my Yahoo inbox gets more spam than my Gmail account.
One way to cut back on spam is to avoid having your e-mail address plastered all over the Internet. (I give this advice but I don’t follow it, because I want readers to be able to reach me.) Spammers love to harvest e-mail addresses from blog postings, forums and other public places where addresses are posted. One way to avoid this problem is to use disposable e-mail addresses that expire or can be abandoned if they attract too much spam. For a good primer on this, search Wikipedia for “disposable e-mail.”
Another method is to use an ISP that offers a challenge response system. These services send out a message to unknown senders requiring them to go through a validation process to make sure that a human being is behind the message. I’m not a fan of these systems because they can be annoying to people who write to you and can trap legitimate machine-generated mail, such as offers from companies you want to hear from, mailing lists and even bounce-back notices from people you know.
Regardless of what type of spam filters you use, you should never respond to spam messages, even to tell them to stop. Any response is an indication that the message got through to a live person, which makes your inbox an even more valuable commodity to the spammers.
Viva la France! French lawmakers have unexpectedly rejected a bill that would have cut off Internet access to people who repeatedly download music or videos illegally. The law, which was supported by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, could have resulted in a year’s suspension of Internet access for individuals after being warned by both an e-mail and a letter.
The French Senate passed the bill April 3, but it was rejected by a vote of 21-15 last week by a sparsely attended session of the lower house, France’s National Assembly. Similar proposals in New Zealand, Britain, Germany and Sweden have been met with protests by civil liberties groups and others, according to Agence France-Presse.
Based on the number of votes, I’d hardly call the outcome in France a repudiation. The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s international outreach coordinator, Danny O’Brien, expects the bill to be reintroduced and passed. But he thinks it will then be reviewed by France’s Constitutional Council, which is roughly equivalent to our Supreme Court.
“There’s a strong chance that the council will have something to say about this,” said O’Brien, “because it does raise so many questions about natural justice and civil liberties.”
While I am not aware of any similar legislation in the United States, there are reports that the Recording Industry Association of America is exploring ways to get Internet service providers, or ISPs, to voluntarily discipline customers who repeatedly ignore warnings to stop downloading or sharing copyrighted files.
It’s not clear exactly what the recording association has in mind and what type of cooperation they will get from ISPs, but CNet News reported last month that an AT&T executive told an audience at a music conference that the company has started to issue warning notices to people suspected of sharing music files. It also reported that Comcast is cooperating with the association, but neither company has threatened to suspend or terminate accounts of those accused of such violations.
It’s also not clear how the companies’ term of service, which generally prohibit using their networks for illegal activities, could come into play. Comcast’s conduct and information restrictions, for example, prohibits “any unlawful purpose,” including that “which infringes the intellectual property rights of any person or entity.”
The company “reserves the right immediately to suspend or terminate your service” if you violate its agreement, so it wouldn’t be an enormous stretch for it to use the member agreement as grounds for action. In other words, it reserves the right to do exactly what the French law would have forced French ISPs to do.
I’m not sure what is worse — the proposed French law or the idea of voluntary cooperation between the recording industry and ISPs. In both cases there is a lack of due process. Even though there are warnings, there is no judicial review. At least when the recording association sued people, there was an opportunity to face your accuser in a court of law. Voluntary cooperation between companies leaves even representatives of the public completely out of the loop.
One could argue that this is a private matter. ISPs are not government agencies and they should have the right to discipline customers who violate their terms, just as we have the right to pick our ISP. But the problem is that taking away someone’s Internet access these days can be a very severe penalty.
For many people, loss of Internet access could result in the loss of livelihoods as well as their primary source of news and information, not to mention their ability to perform vital tasks such as banking, shopping and making travel arrangements.
What’s more, Internet access is typically shared among every member of a household. Should a child be denied the right to do his or her homework because a parent or a sibling allegedly violates the copyright law? And what about roommates? Are they to be punished for the crime of living with someone who is presumed guilty?
I’m not condoning copyright violations. I’m a copyright holder myself, and my son is a professional musician and songwriter. I respect the need for artists, writers and other creative people to find ways to protect their livelihoods. But if we are going to impose severe punishments for copyright violations, we should do it within the bounds of the legal system.
Laws — not private deals — should be vigorously debated by the public and legislators and, if enacted, should be carried out by courts and real judges, not people who happen to work for recording companies, trade associations or ISPs. The stakes for all involved are that high.
Ford Motor and Opera Software have announced a collaboration to add Web browsing to the Internet-enabled in-dash computers that Ford is installing in some of its trucks and vans.
The built-in Ford Work Solutions computer, which is being marketed to contractors, farmers, construction workers and business owners, is equipped with Microsoft Auto, a version of the Windows CE operating system.
In addition to accessing the Web through the Opera browser, the computer can run LogMeIn to enable remote access to office and home PCs. The computer also includes Garmin GPS navigation and is integrated into the vehicle cell phone. Internet access, through Sprint’s 3G network is available for $25 a month for a 25-megabyte plan or $50 for up to 5 gigabytes of data, which should be more than enough for the vast majority of users.
The computer costs $1,125. It has a 6.5-inch screen and comes with a wireless Bluetooth keyboard. Ford sells an optional wireless Hewlett-Packard printer. The device also has an AM/FM radio and a CD player.
You can use the radio, CD, navigation system and phone while driving, but for safety reasons, the computer and Internet access work only while the vehicle is parked. Also, the system does not allow you to stream Internet audio or video, even while stationary.
Ford says it’s the first vehicle manufacturer in North America to offer an installed Internet device, though there are several in-dash aftermarket devices and, of course, it’s long been possible to use an Internet-connected laptop in a car.
It makes a lot of sense for Ford to offer this to its business customers, many of whom spend the better part of their day in and around their vehicles. Before the economy put a damper on construction, it wasn’t uncommon to see contractors and construction foremen pull out a laptop to get or send information vital to the job.
And having a Web browser makes sense, given the vast amount of resources it makes available. The Ford device also lets users send and receive e-mail and text messages. A message from the office with an address of a job, for example, can be pasted into the GPS application, making navigation a bit easier.
As someone who doesn’t own a truck and probably never will, I’m not a potential customer for this system. But I’m sure Ford and other automakers have considered a consumer version for passenger cars.
If they do offer one — and I’m sure it’s inevitable — I hope they include a media player with the ability to stream audio while the car is in motion. I support not allowing the driver to surf the Web or watch video while driving, but I see no harm in enabling it for passengers.
Drivers can now listen to Internet radio on an iPhone plugged into a car audio system using iPhone apps such as Pandora, Tuner and AOL Radio. Shortly after the iPhone 3G came out, I drove around Silicon Valley with Mercury News reporter Troy Wolverton listening live to East Coast stations and overseas radio and streaming music via Pandora.
While it worked, there are some problems with the iPhone solution. Not only are the phone and service expensive, the device is not designed to be used safely from the car. It’s OK to listen but not safe to tune in a station while driving, even though I’m sure people do it. It would be equally dangerous to use a Web browser to tune into Internet radio while driving.
But it would be nice if future versions of products like this let you use the browser to configure your preferred stations while stationary or from home or work and put up a push-button interface on the screen that lets you tune into your favorite online stations as your car radio now let you access AM, FM and satellite stations.
I think Internet radio could strike a deathblow to satellite radio and present challenges to terrestrial radio stations and networks, including those of CBS, where I serve part time as an on-air and online technology analyst. Of course, broadcasters are already streaming their programming online (most CBS stations are now available on the iPhone through AOL Radio). But in an online world, they will have to compete with anyone who invests as little as a few hundred dollars in a PC, some audio gear and a Web site.
Today, people get live audio in their cars by listening to terrestrial stations that have FCC licenses and expensive transmitters, or to satellite radio with really expensive satellites floating around in space. Competition will be good for consumers as it pressures stations and networks to be more competitive.
Aside from building Internet media players in the dash, the auto industry needs to persuade cellular carriers to lower the cost of data plans. Sprint’s $50 plan, which is $10 less than the plan offered for laptops, is a good start. But I’d like to see prices come down further — perhaps to $19.95 a month.
Scroll down for free detection and removal tools.
The Conficker worm was slated to “phone home” on April 1st but based on reports from security experts, machine’s that made the call didn’t get an answer from the master computers designed to give them instructions. But don’t take this as a sign to relax. The worm — which currently doesn’t have a “payload” — can lie dormant in a PC and strike at any time. In fact, given the world-wide attention to the April 1st trigger, many experts say that the criminals behind Conficker may have deliberately programmed their master PCs to hold off with the intention of doing something later when people aren’t paying attention.
Conficker’s authors put in code that allows the worm to communicate with a master computer to get instructions. Once it gets them, any infected machine can carry them out. What instructions it might get isn’t known but it could be to turn individual machines into “spambots,” which means your PC could wind up relaying spam to others. It could also install a “keylogger” program on PCs which gives the hackers access to people’s user names and passwords.
Even if everything is fine now, it’s important to make sure that your machine doesn’t have Conficker or any other worm, virus or other “malware.” Not only can Conficker strike later, but it has lots of cousins. In fact, there are thousands of worms and viruses floating around and this is a continual threat.
Below are some free tools that can help scan your machine. These tools work only with machines running Microsoft Windows. Although Macs are vulnerable to some (though not as many as Windows) threats, Mac users don’t have to worry about Conficker.
If your computer is infected and (therefore) can’t reach any of the security websites, download a removal tool from another computer and install it on your using a USB drive, CD or other removable media.
Kaspersky (direct download, not a web page)
For More Information
Conficker FAQ (from CNET)
Podcast interview with TrendMicro expert David Perry
Podcast: Worm ‘phoning home’ but getting no answer
Homeland Security Bulletin (more links)
Security experts are advising Windows users to disable the auto-run function. The reason is because the Conficker worm can infect a PC through a USB drive or other USB device including, for example, an electronic picture frame.
Disabling it in Vista is quite easy if you follow these instructions.
With Windows XP, it’s a bit more complicated so you might want to get some help if you’re not technically inclined.
