Categories
Banter Technology

Our acceptance of social photos

Only a few years ago, we would hold our personal photographs of holidays in an album in our homes.  They would only come out when our nearest and dearest visited us and we’d show them where we’ve been, what we saw and what our accommodation looked like.

Photos from birthday parties or weddings may be shared a little more by email, or by providing physical copies to those that were also there.

Would we dream about making those same, very personal photos available to other friends who perhaps would otherwise never get to see our photos, friends from yesteryear or acquaintances?

These days, it seems the answer is yes.  With Facebook, Google+ and others, its almost our first thought when we download our digital photos from our cameras and phones to our computers.  I do it all the time – download to the PC, then upload a selection (based on how I look in them) to Facebook.  I mean my privacy settings are quite tight, but even then there would be more than 100 people who would see my new photos on their Facebook news feed.

Strange how things change so fast and how things that weren’t even considered before suddenly become the ‘done’ thing.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Banter

The surprising truth about what really motivates us

I simply love this video. Its a very intriguing demonstration of how money and economic incentives aren’t the be all and end all of what motivates people at work.

Oh and this guy’s artistic skills are fantastic.

Categories
Current Affairs

The aftermath of the UK riots

A shameful state of affairs for London and the UK as what started off as protesting at the shooting of a local, turned into mass rioting throughout the country.

The first day of rioting seemed to have almost a just cause, though the particulars of the case are still being analysed.  It appears that Mark Duggan, a 29-year old local, was shot with a single bullet by police after the minicab he was travelling was stopped by armed officers.  The second day saw the riots spread and kids as young as 11 were smashing shops and looting.

I had largely ignored it until day 3 hit and there were growing reports everywhere that more and more teenagers were out on the streets terrorising local people, the elderly and helping themselves to gadgets and gizmos as others smashed in shops to get in.

In these economic times, I can almost see and understand why the looting happens especially by those who have the opportunity to do so, but when you hear reports of a woman being stopped in her car, dragged out by the hair before her car was torched, that is harder to swallow.  Add to that the 3 kids killed in Birmingham, 2 pensioners in hospital and countless others injured in the blitz and I can almost hear my blood boiling.

Late on day 3, I was even tempted to jump in the car and head down to Ealing to knock a few heads together.  It was the unbelievable shortage of police on the streets that led to this.  Just 1600 police I think I heard reported on the BBC.  And that was to protect Croydon, Tottenham, Clapham and Ealing as well as other areas.

On top of all that, most of the cabinet was on holiday as was the Mayor of London.  Fair enough, Parliament is in recess so take your breaks, but when riots break out on day 2, surely these ‘leaders’ should have been on their way back or at least setting up face-to-face meetings via video conferencing links – we have the tech in Government to do this right?  Why then, would David Cameron, our PM, call for a Cobra meeting at 9am on Tuesday morning (after day 3 of riots)?  Isn’t Cobra an emergency committee?  On top of that, at 6pm on day 3, the deputy PM, Nick Clegg is on LBC radio taking part in a public Q&A session somewhere in central London – couldn’t he have chaired Cobra as the deputy that same evening?

After Cobra, the PM triples the police numbers on the streets of London in anticipation of more riots.  Guess what?  London stays quiet.  I read a tweet saying this was probably because the looters are at home watching telly on their new 40-inch plasmas!  Another reason for a tamer night in London was that Londoners were out on the streets to protect their shops, businesses, homes as well as each other.  The authorities would welcome this wouldn’t they?  Nope.  Instead the Assistant Commissioner of the Met says they are hampering police efforts and labels them all as vigilantes.  Hardly helpful.  What would you have us do, Mr ‘I’m-only-in-charge-cos-my-bosses-cosied-up-to-Murdoch’?  We waited for 3 days for the Police to show up, they never did.  Insurance won’t cover these riots and I’d rather not end up visiting friends and family in hospital thanks.  I will defend my property.  I will defend my friends and family.  Period.  And against all comers.

Don’t get me wrong.  EDL marchers on the streets / boozers actively taunting looters is not helping anyone, but to put the Sikhs of Southall and the Turks who fought off looters on Day 3 in the same camp is not just wrong, but irresponsible.

The Police have done an excellent job in these tense times, but they were stretched to breaking point.  The PM is to blame for not authorising a larger Police presence early enough and hence forcing the hands of locals to defend their stuff and loved ones themselves.  That is not vigilantism, that is heroic.

Some of the more popular videos from the riots:

Brave Hackney Woman Against London Rioters

London Riots. The BBC will never replay this

London Riots: Scum steal from injured boy

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Technology

Is Google+ any good?

For the best part of four weeks, there seems to be a new craze in the online space – no Apple are not launching a new product, but Google have made yet another attempt at cracking social media and having a worthwhile competitor to Facebook and Twitter.

Well after Wave, Buzz and other ventures it seems Google Plus might be the one to finally give Google a real Facebook-beater, or more likely a Google-challenger.

In the first 2 weeks, Google + amassed close to 20 million users which is staggering.  I’ve seen a graph (see below) that show Facebook and Twitter taking well over 2 years to reach half that.  And this is all without providing an option for businesses to join and without promoting the still BETA service through its other channels, namely Youtube and Google.com.

 

 

 

That said, I very much doubt Facebook is going to go away anytime this decade.  Saying that might be tempting fate as a decade is a long time in the world of the web – however with half a billion people on Facebook and growing, it has the kind of critical mass that MySpace may have never even have dreamt of.

Anyway, this is about Google+ and if it is any good.  Well after playing around on it for most of July, I can tell you a thing or two.  As I’ve already said, its Google’s best effort by far in social networks.  Its very well thought out, is nice, simple and clean to use and just works.  Its like they’ve taken the best bits of Facebook and Twitter, made it look better and meshed them together.  Privacy settings are a breeze, unlike with Facebook – its simple and clear-cut.

G+ has this concept of ‘circles’ into which you put your various connections.  This is great because now you can communicate certain information to certain people much more easily.  You may want to put up photos of last Saturday night to show your friends, but keep those dodgy ones from your professional and work colleagues.  It takes 2-3 clicks to get that sorted out.

Then there’s Hangout – a fab video chat service.  It allows multiple users to join the same ‘hangout’ and see each other.  I’ve only used the once so far and loved the simplicity of it all.

As its still invite-only, there is a certain emptiness feeling you get when on G+ because there’s simply not as much relevant stuff going on as you get in Facebook.  But for me this is just a timing thing.  Once it opens up and the number of users grow, there will be a shifting of focus and that’s when we’ll know that G+ has truly arrived.  Just don’t expect a mass exodus from its Facebook rival!

 

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Banter Technology

A surprising social media recluse

I have written about this before but yesterday, I met another girl who just refuses to sign up to Facebook or any other social media tool.  Some of her friends are even on it and she does know what its about from a third-hand perspective.

Perhaps more intriguing is what she does use to keep in touch with friends as she is quite inseparable from her laptop back home – MSN Messenger.  Yep that’s right that old early noughties tool.  The closest I come to MSN Messenger these days is when I log into my old Hotmail account every now and then and automatically get signed in to the web-version!

The title of this post is “a surprising social media recluse” – the keyword in bold there.

It is surprising because this person is my 16-year old cousin.  She is the youngest person I have met who doesn’t either get it or purposely refuses to sign up.  I tried my best to convince her but to no avail.  My reasons are somewhat selfish because as a family they emigrated to New Zealand about six years ago and it would be far easier to stay in touch with tools like Facebook.

But alas, what will be will be.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Current Affairs

Tax avoiding rich

I’m fed up of hearing about all this nonsense about the rich being amoral by avoiding paying their appropriate amount of tax.  It stinks of jealousy and narrow mindedness that probably keeps the people making those comments where they are in economic terms.

Before anyone calls for my head, including HMRC or equivalent bodies in other parts of the world, let me be clear that I totally condemn tax evasion which is illegal.   Tax avoidance on the other hand is a perfectly legal technique to reduce the tax an individual or company are liable to pay.

There is some merit to wishing that everyone pays the same proportion of tax regardless of income levels and I also see merit in that proportion rising the more you bring in (with a reasonable upper limit of course).  However, it is hardly amoral for the rich or indeed anyone, to want to pay less using methods that are in line with the law and guidelines of the country from where that income is derived.

Not many people could claim that they actually want to pay tax, and I’m sure that a high percentage of those that do would be being less than honest with themselves.

If a rich person such as Sir Philip Green is paying less tax by living in Monaco and having his businesses in his wife’s name then good for him.  If this is ‘wrong’ then we should be shouting at the Revenue for allowing such rules to exist in the first place, not at those smart enough to be taking advantage of them.

Let me turn this thing on its head (excuse the pun which you’ll understand in a moment).  There exists a law in the UK from way back when, that putting a stamp with the Queen’s head on it upside down is counted as treason* and as such, punishable by the full force of the law.  This is an actual active law in the United Kingdom.  Would any sane, rational and reasonable person also insist that anyone caught doing this should be sentenced to life imprisonment?

*I know there is some contention as to whether this law is actually real or not. But for the purposes of that paragraph, it doesn’t really matter.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Banter Friends

Why some people shy away from social media?

In my friends circle, it always amazes me how one group have fully embraced social media but in another, it has been almost completely and deliberately been ignored.

The reasons given are usually two-fold:

  • I don’t feel comfortable sharing personal information with everyone.
  • I know who my friends are.  I can speak to them on the phone or go and see them.  Why do I need to go to Facebook to talk to them.  That’s quite sad.

I don’t know if its because of what I do or what my background is, but I just don’t understand this attitude.  Sure, Facebook aren’t exactly whiter than white when it comes to privacy but they have had to cave in to user demands and the huge public outcry when Facebook’s opt-out default settings were brought to light.  The options now available on Facebook’s settings pages are in-depth and quite comprehensive in my opinion, though to less versed people they may still appear somewhat confusing.

In any case, I believe much of this privacy stuff is sorted though the privacy groups and any other interested parties should still keep a close watch on Facebook as they hold so much of our information.

You can now control exactly who sees what on Facebook.  If you don’t want certain people to see status updates or any of them, you can do that.  If you want some of your photos only visible to certain people, you can do that too.  If you don’t want to put up photos of your new baby, fair enough as this is more about superstition than privacy really and I kind of get this.  But otherwise, this couldn’t be an opinion/attitude I agree less with.  Its not even old-fashioned really, especially since this is the generation that the Internet has developed with.  I think it is part ignorance and part stubbornness.

For me its a missed opportunity too.  We’re at the age where most of us are married and about to or have already started families.  This is the moment where you start losing touch with old friends even more than before.  Opportunities to meet reduce further and you have truck loads to catch up on when you do meet.  In today’s world, keeping in touch couldn’t be easier even with our ever busier lives.  The ideal way to keep in touch now with everyone is to see/read/hear snippets of what people are doing, thinking, going, gone.  Guess what?  Tools like Facebook, Twitter and Memfy allow just that so I do feel that its a shame that some of my close friends don’t take advantage.  I know they’ll be there if I really need them, but would rather not have to wait for those exceptional times to catch up.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Current Affairs

Bloody unions

Why the hell are unions allowed to exist in the UK today?  To be fair today’s teacher’s strike is something I know nothing about – I haven’t really kept upto date with it but the tube unions and railway people striking over their disapproval with a lesser percentage salary increase then they think they deserve.

That’s utter nonsense.  Its not about them deserving anything.  Its about the state of the economy and management taking a tough decision.  In fact, management should be able to decide (within reason) about pay packets, working conditions (within the remits of the law), other benefits using their own judgement and not be held to ransom by some media-obsessed yobo who determines his own self-importance and seems to be bullying his members into agreeing with him.

The only benefit for unions that I can see is to effectively stop ruthless employers taking advantage of their staff and treating them unfairly.  The law exists for any unlawful acts, and the freedom of the press should regulate the unfairness.  I say “should” as I do accept that this may not always happen but equally the current situation is unsustainable and deeply imbalanced on the other side.  In the last paragraph I bracketed the words “within reason” and it is these words in themselves that are the issue.  Unions will always insist that if left to their own devices and without the protection afforded to staff by union membership, management would abuse their power and unfairly harm staff interests.  This may have some truth to it, but the current power unions seem to wield is not right, fair or justified.

It has to change.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Banter

Mmmm…….Cheryl

Just saw Cheryl on the latest L’Oreal advertisement…..damn she is hot.

Categories
Banter

How much sleep is enough?

You hear these things about Donald Trump only sleeping for four hours a day and it makes you wonder if the rest of us are just being lazy or is the Donald the crazy one?

I’m a nocturnal worker, meaning I do most of my best work and am most productive after about 10pm.  But I often wonder if sleeping close to 2am is me being determined and focussed or is it me being silly and irresponsible.

I know there have been studies done on how behaviour and personalities can be temporarily altered if you are deprived of sleep.  This change can slowly become permanent if the deprivation continues for a longer period of time – not quite sure how long ‘longer’ is.

But then Trump seems to have done pretty well on four hours each day of the week and he’s not dead yet and its unlikely to be the cause of his demise either.  So I wonder if sleep is as necessary as you want to make it or is there a set amount you should get each night to be at your most productive the next day?

I’ve tried both methods.  With less sleep, I need more coffee and can’t work as well later in the evening but with more sleep, I can work later.  One leads to the other so I simply keep yoyo’ing between late and early though try and push more late’s into the week if I can.

If anyone has any insights into this – do tell.

Enhanced by Zemanta