Rabu, 07 Desember 2011

Facebook, Google users should be censored: India



binjaitech--India, the world’s largest democratic country has urged social network companies including Facebook, Twitter and Google to pre-screen content before posting it.
India’s acting Telecommunications Minister, Kapil Sibal has asked them to censor their content and remove any defamatory or disparaging content before it goes online.
India has also told internet giants Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Yahoo to block online content that risks offending “Indian sensibilities”.
Government officials are upset about web users posting derogatory comments about Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Congress party leader Sonia Gandhi and major religious figures.
Kapil Sibal said Tuesday that if Facebook and Google cannot censor derogatory statements on their sites, the government will have to step in. He said his ministry was working on guidelines for action against companies which did not respond to the government’s requests, but did not specify what action could be taken.
Kapil Sibal told a press conference he had met with the companies’ representatives several times over the past three months and have repeatedly asked officials from major internet companies to voluntarily censor some users’ comments. The internet companies told Sibal they worked to US norms. The minister called for them to adapt instead to local standards.
Kabil Sibal has met with the Indian executives most recently on Monday. No agreement, however, emerged between the parties.
The minister wants to ensure that “insulting material” never gets uploaded. He wants internet companies to “give us the data, where these images are being uploaded and who is doing it.”
Facebook responded in a statement Tuesday that it would remove content that “is hateful, threatening, incites violence or contains nudity.”
“We recognize the government’s interest in minimizing the amount of abusive content that is available online and will continue to engage with the Indian authorities as they debate this important issue,” the social network said.
Google and Microsoft declined to comment. According to Google, the Indian government has made 68 requests this year to remove or block content. The government has also expressed concerns that Google Earth could be used by terrorists to examine targets in preparation for an attack. truthdive

Google Celebrates 10 Billion Android Downloads

binjaitech--Google is closing the “app gap” in the smartphone market, at least when it comes to downloads. The company announced on Tuesday that Android users have downloaded some 10 billion apps to date on the Android Market, and that its monthly download rate has crossed the 1 billion mark.

Google Android Market Growth Chart


As you can see in the chart above, those download numbers have been increasing at a brisk rate over the last 18 months or so as sales of Android devices have exploded around the world.
The numbers show that the Android ecosystem is healthy, but with any set of numbers, it’s easy to make of them what you will. For instance, Apple has been at a billion downloads per month for some time, but there are more Android devices in use now than there are iPhones.
That shows that Android users are downloading fewer apps per user than Apple’s iPhone customers, which suggests (to us) there are aspects of finding apps on Apple’s App Store or actually using them on Apple’s iPhones that are better than Google’s Android ecosystem.
At the same time, Android lags far, far behind in paid apps. In November, Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster found that Apple’s App Store generated some twelve times more revenue than the Android Market. At that time, his research showed that 1.3% of Android downloads were paid apps, while 13.5% of iOS apps were paid.
Still, the law of numbers is inexorable. As Android gains more smartphone market share—currently at the expense of everyone but Apple—even that smaller percentage of paid apps will add up, giving more developers more reason to make more apps.
To encourage Android device owners to get used to the idea of paying for their apps, Google is offering a ten day promotion for ten cent (US$0.10) paid apps, starting with the following: Asphalt 6 HD, Color & Draw for Kids, Endomondo Sports Tracker Pro, Fieldrunners HD, Great Little War Game, Minecraft, Paper Camera, Sketchbook Mobile, Soundhound Infinity and SwiftKey X.
The company said that it will offer a new bunch of apps every day at the price during the course of the ten day promotion, which starts today. If you have an Android device, get ‘em while they’re hot and cheap.
We should also point out that these downloads don’t count the apps sold at Amazon’s Appstore for Android or the myriad of other services that offer Android apps. That means that the total worldwide download numbers for Android are higher than the subset represented by Google’s own Android Market, though Android Market certainly represents the lion’s share of that total. macobserver

Jumat, 02 Desember 2011

Zynga, Facebook close in on IPOs


Binjaitech--Zynga, the company behind popular social gamesCityVille and Farmville, is expected to file its final initial public offering prospectus as soon as today, paving the way for a stock offering by mid-December, said a person familiar with the matter, who requested anonymity because the plans are private.

The San Francisco-based company intends to start an IPO roadshow on Monday in New York, the source said. Zynga's IPO is expected to debut at $8 to $10 per share, and raise $900 million on a $10 billion valuation. Zynga declined to comment.

Zynga is one of the social-networking world's success stories, with 227 million monthly users. Through September, it has notched $829 million in revenue, twice as much as in the same period a year earlier. Zynga has earned $121 million since the start of 2010, according to its S-1 filing.

The IPO fortunes of Zynga are a crucial litmus test for the tech IPO market. Despite the success of LinkedIn, IPOs for Groupon and Pandora have sputtered. Groupon closed its first day of trading in early November at a $16.5 billion valuation but has lost nearly 40% since and is now valued at about $10 billion.

Zynga's performance will also weigh on the outlook for Facebook, which is expected to go public in the first half. As the largest gaming company on Facebook, Zynga is a major contributor to Facebook's revenue. Zynga purchases advertising on the site and shares a portion of virtual goods purchases with the social network.

Facebook is expected to file for an IPO in April, when it is required to disclose financials now that it has reached 500 shareholders. A public offering could reach a valuation of up to $100 billion and raise $10 billion, according to a source familiar with the matter who is not authorized to speak on behalf on Facebook.

Facebook's revenue will climb to $4.3 billion this year, double the $2 billion it rang up in 2010, estimates market researcher eMarketer. Advertising will comprise a huge chunk — $3.8 billion — as it did in 2010, when Facebook registered $1.86 billion in advertising revenue.

By 2013, Facebook is expected to earn $7 billion in advertising revenue, according to eMarketer.

Facebook's challenge, after a public stock offering, will be to grow revenue to match IPO expectations, says Internet analyst Greg Sterling. "There will be pressure to use more ads, and convert (members') personal data into revenue," Sterling says.

Zynga also faces issues, including its heavy reliance on Facebook, which grabs 30% of any revenue Zynga generates by the selling of virtual goods that users buy when playing its games. In addition, CEO Mark Pincus, who owns 38.5% of Zynga's voting power, exerts a great deal of control over the business.

Zynga is making moves to wean itself off Facebook as a platform where most of its customers play its games. In October, Zynga discussed plans for its own platform, code-named Project Z. Zynga has a deal with Facebook that runs through 2015. Ustoday

Kamis, 01 Desember 2011

FTC slaps Facebook for privacy concerns, what does it mean to you

Story Image



Binjaitech--Okay, everybody: raise your hands if you believe Facebook’s latest promise not to violate their users’ privacy . . . ?
I didn’t think so. But it’s nice that they still care enough to respond to a formal complaint by the FTC, isn’t it?
The red-star words in the FTC complaint describe Facebook’s statements to its users regarding privacy as “Unfair” and “Deceptive.” It’s worth the read. The complaint raises many complaints in detail. Much of it centers around the fact that the company repeatedly assured its users that if they’ve enabled privacy controls on the stuff they post to Facebook, then there’s no way, no how, no foolin’, for ad networks or Facebook apps to get access to it. Meanwhile, the truth turned out to be more like “Yes, Of Course, and Why The Hell Not?”
Plus, in instances where Facebook promised to streamline privacy settings and make them more effective, the online tools they provided would in many cases cause the user to reveal even more information to advertisers and the public.
Plus, deleting your Facebook account did not, as promised, remove your content from the service.
If only it were this one complaint, too. No, this comes after repeated instances in which Facebook -- in the process of building and deploying new features -- automatically exposed its users’ private content and data instead of asking the user if they explicitly wanted to opt into the new feature.
We’ve heard it all before, and usually in the form of a sometimes maddeningly-casual explanation/apology on the official Facebook blog. CEO Mark Zuckerberg has posted a new one to add to your memory quilt. He’s nice enough to point out that Twitter and Google have also received talkings-to by the FTC recently, implying that the Commission is simply making the rounds. But is it really the same thing? The FTC’s problem with Twitter was its lax security. With Google, the Commission was targeting the memorable (and now discontinued) Google Buzz social service. Google wasn’t clear enough about what sort of data you were exposing if you opted into Buzz. If you opted out, Google was still examining the contents of your Gmail inbox, which ran counter to Gmail’s emphatic statements that such a thing would never happen.
The document that outlines the FTC’s issues with Facebook is a fairly exhaustive smackdown of the entire service, and the company’s whole attitude towards user privacy. In light of this, it seems as though Zuckerbergs’ latest post doesn’t really address anything. With five minutes of simple cut-and-paste editing, the post could become a full-page ad that proudly boasts of the popularity of Facebook and its apps.
Facebook agreed to settlement terms in which they must fix the problems targeted by the FTC and are also required to have an outside auditor certify that their new privacy program complies with the terms outlined by the complaint. The first certification must occur within six months after the agreement is finalized, and then again every two years for the next twenty. Any fault in compliance can result in a fine of $16,000 per violation per day.
Will this agreement actually cause Facebook to change its ways? Who the hell knows. I’m skeptical, because I don’t think they understand on an institutional level that the things they’ve done are in any way a big deal. I suspect that Facebook’s repeated problems protecting user privacy don’t stem from a line in the super-double-top-secret version of Facebook’s business plan that reads “Do the most evil things we can possibly think of, just short of kidnapping children, magically turning them into donkeys, and forcing them to work in our coal mines.”
No, the problem is simply that water tends to flow downhill. When these high-profile problems happen, you can say “that’s completely wrong” and you can install dams and pumps to keep the water out of the valley. Every time the homes at the bottom of the hill get flooded, there can be apologies and a new set of plans and initiatives for preventing that from ever happening again.
Great . . . but!
Water flows downhill. It’s gravity. It’s the nature of a fluid. It never, ever stops and thinks “What’s so great about down? Why don’t we try staying up here at the top?” It’s always going to do what’s in its nature to do.
In the Facebook corporate universe, the universe with laws of physics that they themselves chose and implemented, the natural force of gravity pulls private information into the hands of the public. It’s the principle upon which its one product and the entire company was founded: sharing information. It’s imprinted behavior. Until a tectonic shift hits Facebook, every decision the company makes will be either subtly or explicitly directed towards the desire to remove as many obstacles as possible between a piece of information and its audience.
It’s just like all of those migrating ducks who, to this very day, believe that their mother is the motorized ultralight aircraft that was the first thing they saw after they hatched. It doesn’t matter that they’re now sensible grownup ducks with ducklings of their own and they now know better. There’s still something about the puttttt-putttt-putttt of a two stroke engine and the flapping of ripstop nylon that fills them with a yearning to run after it and fall into formation.
I leave you with this image of adorable fluffy baby ducks because it’s certainly a more pleasant way to end this piece than by warning you that it’s wise to assume that anything you ever put on Facebook is available to anybody who wants to see it, despite your best efforts to keep it under wraps. Suntimes

Kamis, 24 November 2011

A Facebook phone is doomed, doomed, doomed


Binjaitech--COMMENTARY The latest phone rumor craze? The Facebook phone, thank you very much. Chatter about a Facebook branded phone that heavily integrates the company's services into a handset has been around since at least 2009. But the most recent round of rumors has HTC as the manufacturing partner.
It doesn't really matter, though. This is a sign of Facebook's desperation over its business model as an IPO keeps drawing nearer. The company may not have the fiscal performance to justify the incredibly high valuations it has received. So it's time to grasp at straws. Unfortunately for management, branding phones is one strategy that has proven time and time again to be robustly unsuccessful.
Just when you thought you were safe
The new Facebook phone reportedly has a codename already: Buffy. But the title shows that this is anything but a brand new idea. Buffy stands for the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Slayer is a condensed version of a previous project name: the "social layer." (CBS MoneyWatch has a request in with Facebook for a statement. If and when one comes, the story will get an update.)
Originally, Facebook wanted to create a real phone of its own, including industrial design and carrier subsidies. That's some ambition, especially when you consider it took Apple, which already mastered many parts of the consumer electronics business, years to come out with the iPhone.
Today's version of the Facebook phone (or the rumor, anyway) is more like Slayer Lite. The company has scaled back, deciding on an Android-based phone with a heavy dose of HTML5 browser and application love. The idea would be to have social networking services (from Facebook, dare we guess?) integrated into the operations of the phone, rather than just tacked on.
Gotta make money somehow
Why would Facebook bother? Even though a lot of its customers use the social network from smartphones, that's not the reason. Indications are that Facebook isn't the unbridled success story it portrays itself to be, even if it actually does have 800 million users (and that's taking the company's word). Even Facebook's $1.6 billion in revenue booked during the first half of the year actually missed the company's own internal projections by 25 percent.
Facebook needs income. Badly. If it doesn't pull in ever bigger numbers, the market valuation could fall, just as it did with Groupon (GRPN) in its own IPO. (And Groupon has already seen its stock price drop below the IPO pricing.)
What happens in such cases is that big investors push and executives get nervous and consider additional lines of business. Maybe it was the way smartphone users gobbled up Facebook's mobile app that got the company thinking. But those thoughts have strayed in the wrong direction.
Some might argue that CEO Mark Zuckerberg wants to emulate Amazon's (AMZN) strategy, owning a device that ties the user completely into Facebook. It's an interesting thought with a critical flaw. Amazon's strategy works because it has built a walled garden, much like Apple (AAPL), that ties the availability of third party music, books, videos, and the like into its own hardware and software delivery systems.
Facebook, on the other hand, has data that customers have loaded into its systems, which means that the social network does not have a lock on consumers for that material. Its own Open Graph strategy moves someone counter to the walled garden, so there is little leverage Facebook could use to move users into its own devices. (And given the noted privacy issues the company has had, how many consumers would be comfortable handing over even more personal data?)
Unfortunate predecessors
As James Kendrick on our sister site ZDNet noted, this isn't a first test of a Facebook phone concept. The HTC Status had an actual Facebook button on the front. Big deal, no one cared. And it's not as though HTC is a small manufacturer that can't push product.
Microsoft (MSFT) made big noise around the Kin, another phone that tried to focus on social networking. That business disaster had sales numbers so low a grade school student could have kept track of them with paper and pencil. And Kin boasted Facebook and Twitter integration. Once again...everyone, now: no one cared.
Why should they? You can get apps for Facebook that run on virtually any phone you can find. Is Facebook, a social networking company, suddenly going to create a handset/software design so compelling that it will push everyone else out of the way? Seems hard to believe. Especially when the device isn't supposed to be out for another 12 to 18 months.
No, management will have to go back and find other ways of making money, like advertising that works for marketers or services that are so good, people might be willing to pay for them. But selling phones? Sorry, wrong number. cbsnews

Rabu, 23 November 2011

5 Reasons Why Facebook's Phone Will Fail

Facebook’s supposedly forthcoming smartphone, reported by AllThingsD, paints the picture of a company that either thinks it can do no wrong, is feeling incredibly squeezed by Appleand Google or is willing to lose big money just because it can afford to.
Facebook logo
The impression created is that Facebook is weaker and has more problems than most people imagine. Not good with an IPO supposedly around the corner.
According to AllThingsD:
“After years of considering how to best get into the phone business, Facebook has tapped Taiwanese cellphone makerHTC to build a smartphone that has the social network integrated at the core of its being.
“Code-named “Buffy,” after the television vampire slayer, the phone is planned to run on a modified version of Android that Facebook has tweaked heavily to deeply integrate its services, as well as to support HTML5 as a platform for applications, according to sources familiar with the project.”
Since Walt Mossberg’s site gets all the best leaks, I am betting the report is as true a story as Facebook is willing to tell 12-18 months pre-launch. But if their story is a tad off, the alternate reality is more interesting and might be more successful.
I’ll outline that “B” version after first offering my five reasons while a Facebook phone is a pretty dumb idea.
Here goes:
1. People hate Facebook — While Facebook can claim 800 million members, it is hard to say the company is even remotely well-liked by 799 million of them. Thinking people look at Facebook, even more than Google, as a company intent on stealing all the details of their lives in order to sell things. I’ve yet to see Facebook do anything to dispel this notion and the 12-18 month gestation of the BuffyPhone is plenty of time for the legal tables to turn on Zuckerberg & Co.
The same sort of hubris that makes Facebook believe the world is clamoring for it to be in the smartphone business will eventually be its downfall. Facebook has more corporate ego than Microsoft could ever imagine and it will come back to haunt the company in the form of big legal challenges.
If consumers — or regulators — should come to a decision that privacy matters, Facebook will be in deep trouble. The BuffyPhone may become the prime example of what privacy tradeoffs Facebook thinks its customers are willing to accept, especially it comes with larger subsidies than most smartphones in order to keep the price low. How will Facebook make the money back?
2. Nobody wants a Facebook phone — There have already been Facebook phones, at least phones with special Facebook features. One is the HTC Status, which AT&T has recently started giving away. Others, including Inq Mobile, Orange and Motorola have touted special Facebook functionality. So far, the world hasn’t been buying.
Facebook will probably say its new HTC handset will do things the Status could not, but how much can that possibly be?
3. Small market – Even if successful, the market will be small. Facebook really has no choice but to put its best foot forward on all platforms. Will Facebook disadvantage iPhone and iPad users to sell its new BuffyPhone? Hard to imagine. Will it not build clients for other Android phones after the BuffyPhone appears? Nope.
So what can the BuffyPhone do that is important enough that people would buy one, but unimportant enough that users of other platforms won’t miss it?
The best chance for selling Buffies will be to go really deep in specific niche features that a certain subset of heavy Facebook users will love. My guess it that won’t be those of us who manage multiple Facebook pages, but people who use Facebook constantly but not deeply and aren’t big tablet or PC users of the service.
4. Android troubles — As developer of Android and with its pending purchase of Motorola’s handset business, Google is in an excellent position to limit the BuffyPhone’s technological future by limiting the non-Facebook features available to it. I am not saying this will happen, but I expect the Android platform will fragment as Google takes over Motorola and other manufacturers are forced to react. Suppose you can get Facebook but none of the Google apps on your BuffyPhone? Suppose other Android apps aren’t widely available, either?
Maybe there won’t be so much hardball, but with Google, Facebook, Apple, Motorola, and RIM all struggling to define smartphones, the battles could become ugly. And Google and Apple control the dominant platforms — which Facebook will still need. Perhaps more than Apple and Google need Facebook.
5. There’s not enough there — To be successful with out Apple and Google, Facebook will need to be much more than merely a social media service.
It’s best hope for this is strengthening its relationship with Microsoft. Redmond has all the things Facebook lacks in battling Google and Apple and is already a Facebook investor. However, Redmond has repeatedly stumped its toes in it online businesses and its Windows phones are well behind the curve. I can’t imagine Steve Ballmer is too thrilled that Facebook is going Android. Even if Microsoft wanted to really help Facebook, there seems little it can do.
Now, as promised, the counter argument, based on the notion that theAllThingsD report is only mostly correct:
Smart VC Roger McNamee, quoted by Dan Lyons, says Facebook really isn’t intending to build its own phone, just provide software that allows phone manufacturers to add deep Facebook integration into their own products. According to Lyons:
“Despite the breathless reports Tuesday about the Buffy, there are some in the tech world who think the Facebook phone rumors are, well, just rumors. ‘My guess is that the rumors are wrong,’ says Roger McNamee, head of Elevation Partners, a Silicon Valley investment firm.
McNamee says it’s more likely that Facebook is creating a software toolkit that phone makers like HTC can use to create phones that have tight integration with Facebook. ‘It’s just a branding thing. In theory it’s a way for a phone maker to gain a competitive advantage.’”
If true — and maybe enough negative reaction can make it so — the McNamee version of the story has the best chance for success, though Facebook would probably be better off defending its niche and cuddling up to Apple, Microsoft and Google than to do battle with them and pretty much the rest of the world just to have its name on a phone.
What do you think? Leave comments and tell me how you see this playing out.