RE: Action

Google + is launched and the unprecedented level increased from 0 to 20 million users in just over a month. As with many other services start Google in an invite-only Beta version. The corrected bugs and addressed, but no downtime, despite the vulgar rapid growth of subscribers. For users, you probably do not call them yet. Many sign up and see how things develop.

I'm not about to fall off my chair with excitement. The design is Google's usual simple white sheet into three columns. And that's just not cool and stylish as Apple had been behind. Functionality is no different than on Facebook. And with both Facebook and Twitter (and LinkedIn) to each of their networking purposes, I feel no great need for another network.

But anyway, I think that Google is successful with what they could not with Orkut, Wave, Buzz, whatever. With YouTube's potential design changes with Cosmic Panda is perhaps softened for breach of other services on something else like a lifetime dogma? Whether the functionality (eg. Circles) are better utilized - since we are the last few years have been better to use social media - time will tell. And finally, a number of psychological things come into play.

Paul Ford writes empathetic and clear-sighted in NYmag about how a story should end. Social media nature

"Has no understanding of anything aside from the connections mellom enkeltpersoner and the ceaseless flow of time: No Beginnings, and no endings."

and after stories of accumulations of memory and the experiences we have shared on Facebook, Franzen wishing that we have more than LIKE LOVE in our lives and on the individual's access to talk to potentially billions of people, so he writes in the final paragraph:

"We'll still need professionals two orga nize the events of the world til Narratives, and our story-craving brains vil still need the narrative hooks, the cold opens, the dramatic climaxes, and att all-important" ■ "to help us make sense of the great glut of recent history att ice dumped on us every morning. No Matter What Comes along streams, feeds, and walls, We Will Still have the need of an ending. "

Linda Nørgaard Framke is also clear in his voice when she writes that it's the end of the illusion of friendship [ link ]. Relationships are not what they used to, thus giving Google + Framke also an opportunity to start over. She also emphasizes that Google + is more serious than Facebook, where many details in her news feed is irrelevant. Some will disagree with what is perceived as relevant, but the point about Google + is more serious is the same as I experienced when I first wait MySpace tilfordel back to Facebook.

There are probably a few months and some first movers who obtain an adequate feedback that they will continue for Google to attract a critical mass of users. Just as the man in the video (which went viral two years ago) trying to spark a celebration for a Santa Gold concert. In the clip below, the man has already been dancing for several minutes. But it all takes a sudden speed 53 seconds into the video. "I got to be unstoppable," sings Santa Gold. It's just what Google is.

Today (week 22) I read a really interesting article in the Weekend newspaper on "Eli Pariser: The Filter Bubble." It's all about personalization of search results on Google (and news feeds on Facebook), and includes personalization of the Internet in general:

"Also, search engines, social networks and media are increasingly tailored to the individual user, and of course it's an intriguing thought: Fewer useless information and a network that is tailor-made for ourselves. But according Parisers new book 'the Filter Bubble' has personalization seriously flawed. For more information tailored to us, the less often we are presented with opposing views. The uusynlige editing of information closes us inside the filter bubble: our own personal universe of information. We decide not what comes into it, and we can not see what's being edited away.
How network plejde to be a window to the world, it is becoming a mirror that shows only ourselves. "

David Jacobsen Turner has written the article in the knowledge of style and make the subject accessible. Thore Husfeldt, Associate Professor at the IT University of Copenhagen as well as Lund, included in the article (and write briefly about it on his blog ). He has the following good point about an "algorithmic lens" which is shot in between the citizen and information. And the challenger democracy negatively:

"In the blogosphere own creation myth was the media [radio, TV, newspapers] until the 90 controlled by a small group of powerful gatekeepers who controlled the flow of information. The editors decided what information reached the public. The media was organized hierarchically, and the communication went one way: from media to receiver.
With the advent of the network was this picture revolutionized. Today, every person with a computer and the right idea to create his own mini-media and people all over the world can freely exchange information and create a global, debating public. The Internet makes it possible to 'cut out the middleman away', whether there is record companies, department stores - or editors.
But according to Eli Pariser, the human gatekeepers simply been replaced by algorithmic gatekeepers. "

Read more at Thefilterbubble.com

New Times
There are two events that have affected our view of life in recent years. One is the pursuit of celebritys - and amateur foray into this world, the persecution of these people. The other is the Internet and its ability to produce, collect, manage and distribute data about you. It is the latter that has my interest.

Fear, paranoia, idealism, pragmatism, indifference, ignorance, sensationalism and more to characterize a debate about privacy on the Internet, both must deal with ethical philosophical dimensions as well as capitalist mechanisms. Information writes in the article " Would you like to share vacation photos with the Stasi? "in a perverse tone about how our privacy is threatened. Google and Facebook are compared with a manipulative and murderous organization, and by throwing on with examples to the right and left it exemplifies a journalistic approach to a complex problem.

Big Brother is often portrayed in a negative light. Supermarkets' collection of data using kassebonnens small table, which reveals that the majority of buyers of Ariel washing powder also acts Lambi kitchen towels, helps supermarket not to put both things on offer in the same week. Are you afraid that a system that does not think himself wiser than you and that therefore you can not make your own choices?

Your data online is a commodity
I have for almost 11-12 years used Google as a search engine. In 3-4 years I've been on Facebook and a single year just passed on Twitter . At no time have I paid them a penny.

The Internet is here to stay. Google is here to stay. Facebook is here to stay. We use the services to surrender our data. It is our commodity in a world that is not free, but available.

It is not my intention to discuss the mechanisms of and implicationerne of Freeconomics [ book ] [ Wired ]. But free means paradoxically that the consumer is not completely free. The information I provide will be used to myself, personally, as well as data are added to a larger amount when my behavior down in the pile of others' behavior.

Legislation, relevance and myself
When I create on social media (Facebook, Youtube, Wordpress, etc.), where I create and share content, I say yes to a number of conditions. I will for several reasons. If no services had my consent, they could not publish my actions. It would be against the law and thereby make it impossible to service in its nature (possibly Penal Code § 263 and § 264, Privacy Act § 7 and § 8 and Administration Act § 28 the direct reference in the Danish context, but I do not really). The actions I make will be for their property (mostly non-exclusive). The knowledge they acquire, they can then use to improve their service.

When I search on Google, it is their intention to make the results more relevant. Their knowledge of my preferences through previous searches are assisting with this. The advertisements are displayed can have a tendency to appear to be relevant content. But as long as they adhere to the Marketing Act, I have no problem with it.

The Internet offers some new opportunities in marketing to target and measure our actions. Of course, it should be exploited. Let me quote information when Stephan Humer said:

"The biggest problem with privacy and the internet is people's inability to deal with the problem. It is a matter of technical competence. We can find again and again. Many people simply find it difficult to handle the problem, and they act before they think, "[He] mention the debate on VHS machine adverse impact on youth in the 80s as an example of lack of knowledge about new media.

"If people knew what conditions they go into, it would not be so bad."

Privacy is a social norm
The above is in the blog based on an expression of my personal views. I'm not saying that Big Brother is good. But I think that Constanze Kurz (quote again from the Information) is right when she says:

"I think we need to invent new social norms, but also new legal rules that may prevent the technology's entry into the private sphere is perceived as something obvious,"

What my grandparents or parents perceived as privacy is not the same as I perceive as privacy. And the younger generations (critical and natural) use of social media will also affect my standards. Privacy is a social norm and we are just starting to ask questions.

Since last week (and up) is one of the major topics of conversation, news sites and blogs by News Corp - personifiseret in Robert Murdoch - will block that Google indexes all of their newspapers online content (The Times, The Sun, The Sunday Times, New York Post, Wall Street Journal, etc. etc. and their Fox and all its sub-brands).

On the one hand, some journalists and claps his hands above the blade out from the mouth and the fight against the mighty Google will be addressed. On the other hand, network media and taking his head above the old fashioned way of looking at reality. I can refer to Ole Nørskov ( Media Watch ) on the one hand, and Danny Sullivan ( Search Engine Land ) on the other side.

TRAFFIC ON THE INTERNET

The rationale from the news media's side as equal to:

Murdoch says he is not interested in the random traffic. He can see that you can tell the advertisers that there are so many users of the newspaper online but he prefers loyal users who come back to the content they find interesting - and pay for it - rather than randomly wandering users who do not pay for it.

But this premise is wrong. Erick Schonfeld has an article from April 2009 written that Google News, Yahoo News and other aggregatorere not the actual news, but just stand as they are in. And the news media's fear of Google to the same extent transferred to Digg, Delicious, etc. services?

And with the above article from Danny Sullivan, there's no reason to block Google. It's news consumers should be kept out if they do not want to pay - if the industry that is willing and believe in the business model.

Speculation: News Corp. vs. Google

I've seen highlighted that Google in less than one year shall pay the final installment of the record contract with Myspace (News Corp.) on web search from Myspace - see TechCrunch May 2009 . But it is not abundant conspiratorial thinking that these things should be mixed together? MySpace problem to recoup the purchase price originally paid to be found elsewhere - the music industry (nuff said).

And it is also just speculation that News Corp could go to Bing and say that Microsoft can pay to be allowed to index the content and then market themselves to users that they - unlike their competitors - have all content on the web. Firstly, it is Murdoch not especially after Google. He mentions in the interview, Microsoft and Ask in the same breath. Secondly, it's more about the newspaper business model. The subscription numbers are falling - in some places dramatically. So instead of having to rely on printed newspapers, then Murdoch see opportunities online.

Speculation has gone after in this video on YouTube with Jason Calacanis I have seen through a second article on Techcrunch .

FREE ACCESS TO CONTENT

But the idea is as interesting enough to pursue. Not in terms of going after Google. But in relation to copyright and access to information on the Internet.

Will News Corp (and others) managed to introduce micro payments and keep search engines out, then the Internet as we know it today is changing its basic structure. Either the news media's suicide, because others would be happy to meet users' needs for news and users do not see 'quality' in the old newspapers as journalists and editors are watching. Or get the news media's success in taming the population to a degree the music industry has long failed with.

FUTURE

And basically I do not believe it. And it makes you probably do not either. Traditional newspapers risks in those years a bloodbath of dimensions because of competition from other traditional news outlets. Twitter is not a newspaper-killer. But it is the users' behavior, perhaps?

If newspapers fail to maintain its position as the point where I as a user goes to when I need to be updated and get the correct information, so their time is over. At best, they live a more humble life side by side with clean user created news media aggregators as newser.com, Yahoo / Google News and new additions to the online magazine that brings together niche content from, for example. blogs and creates interesting sources of information.

It will mean that many people with a journalistic position and / or training must redefine their professional identity, which some people are already doing. Both by virtue of changes in the media. And because there is no need for so many paid reporters.

Google has taken out a patent on their website. This means that Google has the right to a website consisting of a large search box with two buttons underneath and a few links around.
The original news is available on Gawker.com . And the news is perhaps saying too much when there is a 4 ½-year long dispute between lawyers who have been settled to Google's advantage.

IBM is currently seeking a patent for a remote control, twitter, blogger or update your status, for example. Facebook, when watching television (as above I saw it first on Slashdot ).

I honestly do not know what companies think of today. Imagine if the church took a patent on the cross and the King of Denmark had secured the right to the heart. Or more seriously, if Ford had filled a patent on the car where we had so been today?

"Ford patents motor vehicle on wheels"

I understand perfectly well that investing in research and development of products is expensive and that products must be protected by some form of copyright. And it must be with an off-taste in the mouth that Novo Nordisk require so much money for life-saving medicines that can save lives in the Third World. But without market mechanisms would medicine might never have been developed in the absence of business potential.

But in light of the quote about apples and ideas in the previous blog post , so it seems somewhat old fashioned to keep things to themselves. I did not tell about the two scenarios described in the report " Anarconomy ", though now they are interesting enough.

One way it can go, is that some will fight for stronger legislation. Microsoft seems to have an interest that there should be a global patent system (see article on CNET News .) It can be seen as a response to the global impact that we are under. However, from a power perspective, the proposal only serves to reinforce monopolies.
Pirate Party's success in Sweden and the growth in other European countries are actually helping to escalate the scenario of a conflict.

Another scenario that I want to be an advocate for is where Open Source is seen as a welcome competitor to the commercial. There will still be money to be made to issue guarantees (in that it works). It can Open Source do not really, because there really is no charge to point back to and possibly. sue. Income basis will still exist, but only manifest itself in other products, or instead of adventures. The commercial will have some opportunities to tailor solutions and focus on the special of the general solutions in a manner other than that which is free.

On the whole, I have difficulty understanding that people are so busy protecting their ideas from others to build upon them. If it's because I never have had an original idea, then it might be a position with a short time, thanks. In this case it's just idealist who speaks right now. And later it will be so cynic, whether I have become rich on the idea or not.

This year I have already been presented to several things beyond my comprehension.

One of them is Augmented Reality, where, for example. paper with the 3D image set against a webcam turns into a small wind farm in a natural landscape , where a little breath into the microphone causes them to rotate. And Layar, an Augmented Reality mobile browser can tell me about what I look at and tell me the data that now might be linked to this. See another video .

I have vacation. It means that I get cleaned up. Which brings me to another thing that has shaken my perception of opportunities in technology.
One of the things I've missed this spring is the Google Wave . I had only skimmed the news about what's in store for us even when it is launched to the public. Google Wave would be something with a new document production tool for multiple participants simultaneously. But it is much more than that.

This video presents the Google Wave of approx. 1 ½ hours. It was recorded at the Google I / O in May 2009 where Stephanie Hannon, Lars Rasmussen, Jens Rasmussen undergoes an early version of the Google Wave for approx. 4,000 developers.

Google Wave is open source, just as the brothers Rasmussen's previous generation Google Maps . This means that it is possible (and to be encouraged) to build applications / gadgets and use APIet for your own use of the Wave as a standalone or in an existing service.

There can be no doubt that Google Wave is distinguished by setting new standards in the Real Time Web. Google Wave changes the use of email, Instant Messaging improves, enhances the potential for image sharing, management of discussion groups, etc. etc.
Google Wave is primarily a communicative tool. It affects the publishing process by making me independent of services, platforms and distribution channels.

Wave uses drag-n-drop technology, which makes it look extremely easy out. But it also has many other features that are state of the art. For example, use their spellchecker Natural Language Processing to understand the syntax and word. There is already built an extension for Wave in the form of a "translator" (40 languages) and the translation is alive. Just like everything else, both the sender and receiver see what each other does.

The most inspiring to me is the possibility that more persons shall within a document simultaneously. At the same time can make a "play back" the changes that are made along the way, makes the product in my eyes are going far out of the box without losing the connection to reality. It is very impressive. But the way to add links and comment across services is superior to everything and everyone.

A while ago I read in Computer World on Opera, which was starting to expand their browser to a server. There is certainly some contexts here and something will happen with the way we are on the Internet within the next few years. When I'm at home privately, have started to use Flock 2.5 , which is a Firefox browser with social features. Features on Facebook and Twitter are really good. A Better Wordpress integration and an integration of Last.fm would make it even funnier. I do not know if Flock is going to do it for me. But then there's probably someone else who will.

It is not because all Google products or acquisitions that ends in great success and beat competitors. It is first and foremost their search engine and its AdSense / AdWords, which has enabled them to great advantage. But that is the development and other new initiatives certainly interesting to follow in. Both of the private interest of good products, but also academically based on business models for Internet companies today.

Google now challenging Microsoft and their Internet Explorer to launch Google Chrome:

• On their official blog writes a product manager a little about intension behind: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html
• Google has even released an educational comic book that tells the browser functionalities: http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

A colleague recently made me aware that the upcoming Internet Explorer 8 has a built-in "InPrivate Blocking". Evil tongues in the network forums and blogs writes that it is an anti-Google weapons to prevent services like. Google or other (Gemius, Wonder Loop, etc.) to capture information about users, or "Ad targets." Likewise, the fact is that IE8 will automatically forward queries for addresses to Microsoft Live Maps.

It is not just Internet Explorer that may be affected by Google Chrome. Despite the fact Firefox is also the next three years (new contract just signed http://news.cnet.com/ ) is partly funded by Google, by having them as your default search engine in the browser so it can mean a farewell to development of this browser if Google gets more success with their own?

Immediately it is not because our Danish online services business is under threat of Google Chrome, but the situation around the new browsers raises yet a number of issues that are worth pondering.

FDIM has just published a study of Danish's Internet habits. Normally includes toplist for most visited sites in Denmark alone sites member FDIM. The report had something new with other sites. Besides getting certified google supreme position among the most used sites, so the report also offers information about time, rhythm, foreign traffic, top lists, target groups and what types of sites (media, dating, social, etc) Danes visiting.

GOOGLE
When 68% of Danes visiting Google and number two in a row, Krak.dk, visited by 37%, it becomes clear how Google is synonymous with the Internet in Denmark. 50% of the time spent on search, followed by 6% to Gmail, while the other time was distributed in a large number of smaller Google services.

VIDEO
Youtube is the fifth of Danes most popular Internet service. The most striking is probably that no Danish site has managed to break through with the video, despite the great interest.

Surprises
Kelkoo is visiting most popular price comparison service online. Greater than Pricerunner, EDBpriser.dk, DinPris and other similar sites. What surprises me most is the size. Nearly 500,000 users in January, which corresponds to what jp.dk and places them on a 26th space.
123hjemmeside with little more than 400,000 users, I also think is tremendously much. But I have apparently closed its eyes to the amateur country?

INTERESTING
Men prefer Ekstrabladet.dk, while women prefer MSN. There can be analyzed much, so I will leave it there.

BLOGS
Blogger.com had 370,000 users in January, Wordpress 170,000 and blogspot 80,000. It says nothing about how many people write, but how many people are reading. With the explanation is, however, that user-generated content now value highly in Google's ranks. That means that searches on Google almost by automatic means visiting blogs, debates, and the like rather than other sites on the topic.

The report can be downloaded here:
http://www.fdim.dk/downloads/Dansk% 20internetbrug% 202008_web.pdf