Why the disenchantment with Twitter?

Posted on by

This morning’s Observer column

For most of its short life, Twitter has had a good press, partly because of the way it has stood up to attempted bullying by lawyers and security authorities seeking the personal details of users. During the attacks on WikiLeaks after the release of US diplomatic cables, Twitter functioned as a way of bypassing the withdrawal of Domain Name Services (DNS) for the site, providing a workaround that allowed access to WikiLeaks. It also played a significant role in the Arab spring, especially in Egypt – all of which persuaded the world that Google might not be the only internet corporation that had “Don’t be evil” engraved on its corporate DNA.

Recently, however, Twitter has come in for some heavy criticism on two fronts. During the Olympics it suspended the account of Guy Adams – the Independent’s man in Los Angeles – who had been posting hyper-critical tweets about the awfulness of NBC’s coverage of the Games. Twitter claimed that the suspension was because Adams had broken its rules about not revealing people’s email addresses. Critics alleged that it was because of the fact that Twitter had a commercial arrangement with NBC, and that this had led it to curtail Mr Adams’s freedom of speech. “Twitter is becoming old media,” fumed one venerable netizen, Dave Winer, echoing the sentiments of some other netheads.

Dear Delegate…

Posted on by

An excerpt from my Open Letter about the Communications data Bill to LibDem delegates at their Annual Conference.

The draft bill is riddled with flaws. Look at the commentaries by experts such as Professor Robin Mansell of LSE, or the evidence given to the joint committee by Professors Ross Anderson and Peter Sommer.

Your political masters will tell you that it’s all very complicated, which it is. They will also assure that “the devil is in the detail” and if we can get the details right, then all will be well.

Well, actually, in this case the devil isn’t in the detail – it’s in the principles underpinning the bill. And they aren’t complicated at all. If you wanted to put it in everyday terms, the CDB is the equivalent of a proposal that all household waste should be accumulated and kept for at least a year because somewhere in that Himalaya of trash there’s bound to be evidence of wrongdoing.

Why am I telling you this? Because unlike the delegates to other party conferences, you have the ability to make party policy. And when the issue of the CDB comes up, ask yourself a simple question: is this what you came into politics to do — to facilitate the mission creep of the National Security State?

The next phase (and the threat to Apple and Google)

Posted on by

From Business Insider.

There are two major trends that will dictate the future of the tech industry.By the end of this decade more people will be using the Internet through a mobile device than through their desktop.The Internet is becoming Chinese. Already, there are more Internet users in China than there are in any other country in the world. That lead will only grow. Research firm IDC says China’s market already accounts for 25 percent of the world’s smartphone sales, more than the US’s 17.5 percent.These trends combine to create an obvious reality: Any company that wants to control the future must have a firm grasp on the smartphone market in China. 

What’s a lawyer for?

Posted on by

Terrific address by Larry Lessig to the graduation class at John Marshall Law School. It’s about what’s happened to the practice of law in America. Vintage Lessig: witty, thoughtful, moving. Inspiring, even. Best lecture I’ve seen in ages.

Make yourself a cup of coffee and watch it.

Nipplegate

Posted on by

It seems that the New Yorker got temporarily banned from Facebook for violating their community standards on “Nudity and Sex,” by posting a Mick Stevens cartoon showing a post-coital Adam and Eve. Here’s a snapshot of the relevant section of the aforementioned guidelines:

Reassuring to know that male nipples are ok, isn’t it?