http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php Copyright 2010, Michaela Merz Michaela Merz en-US SPHPBLOG 0.5.1 http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100902-135019
X=Existing phone or network company
N=New visionary service or feature

X!=N

I know, it's a complicated formula. It simply states, that new visions and ideas usually take the phone- and network carriers by surprise. Those companies have the wires, the customer relation a working subscription system - why can't or won't they translate it into rocket fuel that propels them to the top of the foot chain?

Take Skype. A more or less simple system that allows people to talk, video-chat and even phone people - bypassing the carriers in the process. Same with IPTV and video on demand. The phone-companies just slept through the (ongoing) process of development in the Internet. Think about PayPal - how easy it could have been realized by phone companies allowing people to buy stuff and pay with their phone-bills.

The network-carriers did nothing. They made their wires 'wireless' but they relied on their wire-bound and old-fashioned concepts of long-term contracts, tethering or playing real-life Monopoly. How sad to see all that muscle go to waste. They are now spending millions of dollars to convince politicians and the public that an uncontrolled, free and wild Internet is bad. They want to force their way of thinking upon us by trying to manipulate who will be allowed into their first-class, Orwell controlled and censored "walled gardens" and who would be "stuck" in a slower, more unreliable "free" network. It's the war of the worlds. A civilization (the carriers) having ignored the signs and developments are now trying to capture another civilization (us) not by vision, developments or cooperation, but by lobbying and force.

Unfortunately, a lot of former "free thinkers" are happy to oblige. Take Apple or Google for example. They sell us their hardware and tether us to a carrier. Now the carriers define what software we are allowed to run on our devices. They are trying to turn back the clock to pre 1968 - when livin' was easy for them. Nobody was allowed to attach anything to their precious wires - no modems, fax-machines or other phones. However, in 1968, the Federal Communications Commission allowed the Carterfone and other devices to be connected directly to the AT&T network - allowing innovations like answering machines and other stuff.

Without the FECs intervention, we might not have the Internet today.

What does that tell us? Innovation needs liberty. As long as phone-companies or carriers are allowed to block whatever they don't like to see in their networks, visions or great ideas are muffled, blocked or even extinguished. We shouldn't allow this to happen.

I have been hired as a consultant by quite a few different carriers. I suggested new ways to use their networks, new services, new products - all in harmony with what is available and in good, fair cooperation with the Internet community. They paid me, thanked me and continued to do what they did for the last 80 years or so - charge people for their "minutes" while trying to prohibit alternatives.

I am very fond of network- and phone companies - no tongue in cheek. They could contribute greatly to the development of a universal, fast, reliable and affordable universal communications environment, with and without wires. They could play a pivotal role in multimedia and entertainment delivery, safe, flexible payment solutions and so much more. However - as long as they play their muscle game, we have to hope for another farseeing FEC ruling. It should come soon, or we might find ourselves flung back into a past where all programmers wear suits and listen to Petula Clark on expensive digital "single song" storage devices (also known as "singles").
]]> http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100902-135019 Michaela Merz Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:50:19 GMT http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/comments.php?y=10&m=09&entry=entry100902-135019 http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100831-144249
Am I suddenly in a mad house? Or is this the beginning of the end?

Neither of those companies is in dire straits and needs to protect its business. They are all billionaires. What is the possible outcome of all this? A few millions more? A few new super rich lawyers?

It is my honest opinion that all these so called 'patent' lawsuits are nothing but a crooked attempt to make more money from nothing. Larry Allison and Paul Allen are very good at selling buffalo bagels as donuts. And Steve Jobs, or God, as a few hundred thousand of his followers call him, can't accept that the Iphone will, sooner or later, lose it's premier market position to the power of the community, powered by Android.

I hate to tell you I told you so - but - I told you so.

If you are looking for reasons why Richard Stallman (Free Software Foundation), the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) and others have fought long and hard against software patents - well, look around. In a few years from now, no startup, no small company will dare to enter the market with a new software or service. Only the big players will be able to verify the complex patent jungle or have the power to defend themselves.

Our Internet, the vibrant, colorful community driven environment we all love and depend on will simply die. It will cease to exist. It will be transformed into a virtual, corporation controlled mixture of Disneyland and Las Vegas - a big IPhone.

Those few remaining jedi-knights out there are fighting a lost war against the powerful interests of software companies, telecommunications carriers, the music and movie industry, the newspaper giants and all those politicians who would like to keep their little secrets in the dark.

We all have been lured by the convenience, the nice looks and the promises of the other side. We have abandoned our visions, ideas and philosophies. We have been demoted from Internet owners to Internet users.

I am truly ashamed.
]]> http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100831-144249 Michaela Merz Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:42:49 GMT http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/comments.php?y=10&m=08&entry=entry100831-144249 http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100805-103657
Yet - the majority of people ain't got no problem with the Government buying illegally obtained data to prosecute tax evaders. Hey - it serves 'em millionaires right.

It comes as no surprise, that people in America don't have a term describing the pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others - they must use the loanword 'schadenfreude' - which is of German origin. It's that feeling of envy and, well, schadenfreude, that helps a big part of the German population to forget that, in the future, illegally obtained data may be used to kick their butts.

If the government is allowed to use data, even if it is illegally obtained, to go after tax evaders, why not use other data to go after copyright violators, insurance frauds (even the small ones) or the every day tax cheater? What if that data won't target millionaires, but 'normal' people?

Don't get me wrong - evading taxes should be prosecuted. But should any government pay thieves to get evidence? A government should be a moral instance - it shouldn't sway from the right way even if there's loot to be found.

From my point of perspective, the German government has lost a big chunk of credibility. And the people? Their fight for privacy seems not to be a fight for the common good. It's most likely the desire to keep their petty little secrets in private. After all, Google Streetview data could be used to persecute traffic violators or worse - could show their face in front of a adult entertainment business.

And never mind the neighbor gettin' busted.

He most likely deserved it.
]]> http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100805-103657 Michaela Merz Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:36:57 GMT http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/comments.php?y=10&m=08&entry=entry100805-103657 http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100624-030416
Well - it's time somebody stands up to say: Thank You Google.

Thank you for your search engine. Yes - it sometimes sucks and I would have a few suggestion that would enhance the search experience (like 'last-modified' time stamps within the search results). But generally speaking: I usually find what I am looking for.

Thank you for Android: Even though the community has been working on operating systems for small handheld devices (think pdaXrom, Angstrom etc.), Android has made it to the top of my list. It's open, it's Linux based, it has support from a lot of hardware manufacturers, it looks nice and it works quite well.

Thank you for GoogleEarth: Isn't it amazing to zoom around our planet to watch places? A 'life' view would of course make it more interesting - but I don't want to be greedy here (Just kiddin') GoogleEarth is breathtaking and deserves a hearty thanks, Google.

Thank you for Streetview Who else would take on such a tremendous task - and give out the results for free? I don't mind Google taking pictures of my house or neighborhood. The advantages of 'streetview' outweigh the 'feeling' of being 'watched' by far. Wake up people - and welcome to the new world.

Thank you for GoogleMaps, other interfaces and gadgets, But I have to confess: I am not using any of them. I don't want our projects to depend on you. Sorry. However - I see your maps and other stuff linked into thousands of web-pages. They make life easier for a lot of web-designers and visitors.

Thank you for Chrome: Though I am still hanging on to Mozilla. But competition is good - and Chrome kicks a few butts. BTW: Thanks for supporting the Mozilla Foundation as well - I am sure, that without your support, Mozilla would not be as good as it is.

Thank you for all the other things: like supporting and funding community projects, fighting for a free Internet without providers deciding who can get what how fast, thanks for the good stuff you did without people knowing.

I understand that Google is a 'for profit' business. But instead of playing the old 'You do what I want you to do' game, powered by Microsoft, Apple and others, Google's business-model is based on sharing.

Yes - I delete my 'cookies' and LSOs from my cache whenever I terminate my browser. Yes, I am running 'NoScript' within my browser - I am trying to avoid revealing too much of myself to Google and others. But Google doesn't mind. They don't force me to do anything.

Are they a danger to society? Data gathering super monsters?

As long as they behave the way they do, I don't think so. Will they always be a good neighbor? I hope so. However - as with all big companies: We should keep an eye on them to make sure they continue to play by the book.


All the best.

Michaela


]]> http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/index.php?entry=entry100624-030416 Michaela Merz Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:04:16 GMT http://www.michaelamerz.com:82:82/blog/comments.php?y=10&m=06&entry=entry100624-030416