Happy Birthday Bob - 7 songs to commemorate Bob's 70th

What better way to celebrate Bob Dylan at 70, a rather fraile troubador after years of perpetual tour, than listen to the quintessential Dylan song: Like a Rolling Stone. This iconic tune was an unlikely #1 hit on the Billboard charts. An eight minute song was unheard of I prefer the recording from a 1966 concert in Manchester, England to the studio version from Highway 61 Revisited. The live version captures the iconic Dylan turning his back on the topical "protest songs" that made him famous and the audience that came to hear him sing the familiar ballads accompanied by acoustic guitar.
As Dylan comes out for the second set with a Fender Stratocaster accompanied by The Band, the crowd turns on him. Someone shouts Judas admist the catcalls. Dylan responds by cranking up the volume and turns the refrain "how does it feel.." into a snear.

Can you bzzzz me now? Study says cell phones are killing honey bees

Can you bzzzz me now? Study says cell phones are killing honey bees

Think cell phone-induced brain cancer is bad? According to a recent study, its not brain cells our phones have been killing, but honeybees.

According to researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, honeybees are confused by the electromagnetic signals coming out of cell phones. The study found that the presence of cell phone signals increased bee activity, causing accidental swarming as the bees struggled to communicate above the noise.

The experimenters figured this out by placing cell phones next to beehives, the act of which resulted in a tenfold increase in the signal that informs worker bees to leave their hives. The increased activity also serves to indicate that a swarm is in danger, which posed further issues.

This research, while not entirely new, points to only one of many possible causes for the massive bee die offs that have occurred in recent years. Other theories have pointed to pathogens, pesticides and global warming, but fixing those issues pales in comparison to the Herculean efforts required to separate people from their cell phones. Sorry, honeybees, but I have to take this call.


China's Internet: The Invisible Birdcage | DigiCha

From Evernote:

China's Internet: The Invisible Birdcage | DigiCha

Clipped from: http://digicha.com/?p=1490

China’s Internet: The Invisible Birdcage

This essay I wrote last year originally appeared in the September 2010 issue of the China Economic Quarterly. Some of the numbers may already be a bit dated but it is still relevant. The editor chose the title; all errors are my responsibility.

“China internet adds 12th website” – The Onion (July, 2009)

The Onion’s satirical headline reflects a common foreign perception – reinforced when Google pulled out of its China business in early 2010 – that China’s internet is a suffocated tool of the state. That idea is mistaken. Censorship of certain subjects is pervasive, but the internet in China is thriving: over 400m Chinese regularly go online, private-sector internet companies generate billions of dollars in annual revenue, and the 30 or so listed Chinese firms have a combined market capitalization approaching US$100 bn. Although the state’s grip is tightening, the vast majority of Chinese websites remain relatively free of state interference. The Onion ignores the fact that three of the top six global internet businesses are Chinese.

This vibrant social space has distinctive characteristics. The amazing popularity of online gaming – uniquely, in China, more lucrative than advertising – attests to netizens’ focus on entertainment. Instant messaging, online chat sites and bulletin boards, moreover, are far more widely used than email. But in other respects China’s netizens resemble their counterparts in the West. They read news, download music and watch movies (many of them pirated). Social networking sites are growing in popularity, and the popularity of Twitter-like microblogs exploded over the past year. Indeed, the internet has created an unprecedented space for civil discourse in China: netizens use bulletin boards, instant messaging (especially Tencent’s QQ service), social networking sites, blogs and microblogs to share information, gripe, expose corruption, and otherwise carry on a robust and growing online conversation.

Inevitably, the growing economic and social clout of the internet has made it a target of greater government regulation. Until 2007, the regulatory environment was actually rather lax, which created pace for nimble, private startups to dominate the emerging industry. But Beijing is beginning to assert its regulatory grip: the State Council published a white paper in June outlining detailed plans for governing the internet’s development, and the number of foreign social networking websites blocked by the “Great Firewall” grew over the past three years. The internet is now heavily regulated, although self-censorship remains the chief means of controlling content. Private players remain on top, but cashed-up state-owned media enterprises such as CCTV have aggressive expansion plans and hope to knock private competitors off their perch.

Game Theory

The Chinese internet’s revenue structure is quite different from that of the US and other Western countries, which are dominated by advertising. At over US$4 bn, China’s online gaming revenues are larger than those of the US. Tens of millions of Chinese online gamers play a wide variety of games, from solitary card games to multiplayer role-playing games and shoot ’em ups. The boom in online gaming has created several US-listed, billion-dollar companies, including Shanda Games, Giant Interactive, Perfect World, Changyou and Netease. Tencent, China’s largest internet company and the third largest internet company in the world by market capitalization, derives a large chunk of its profits from online gaming. When the industry started in 1999-2000, complex multiplayer games were all imported, but a series of government development programs helped domestic gaming companies to grab the lion’s share of revenues. Strict regulations explicitly protect domestic champions from competition, and foreign gaming firms cannot sell their products in China without a local Chinese partner. Beijing recently put in place export incentives for Chinese game firms, while reaffirming the restrictions on foreign games.

Crucially, online gaming is responsible for creating a viable online payments system in a country with very low credit-card penetration and almost no concept of recurring subscription charges. Most games offer at least a half dozen payment channels, including top-up cards, debit cards, credit cards and Paypal-type online payment services, notably Alibaba’s Alipay and Tencent’s Tenpay. Typically for the sector, the government allowed private companies to develop these services over several years before introducing a detailed regulatory regime, which will take effect from September 1. State-owned players are now eying the potentially lucrative online payments market, with China Mobile’s recent investment in Shanghai Pudong Development Bank widely viewed as a strategic investment to accelerate its mobile payments service.

The biggest winner from the growth of online payments is ecommerce, led by Alibaba Group’s business-to-business (B2B) service Alibaba.com and its consumer site Taobao. Ecommerce trade volume surpassed US$530 bn in 2009, according to official figures, and is on course to surpass the US within five years. Taobao, which destroyed eBay’s business on its way to becoming the country’s dominant internet retail platform, relies on advertisers for most of its income. According to official government statistics, advertisers spent US$3 bn online in 2009, and that figure is projected to grow over 30% per year. Compared, however, to the advertising market in China for television, newspapers and magazines – which measured US$88 bn in 2009, according to market research company Nielsen – the online ad market is still disproportionately small. China’s online advertising revenues are only around 15% of ad revenues in the US, and there is considerable potential for growth.

Digital Triumvirate

The success of homegrown internet names such as Taobao and Baidu at the expense of global giants like Ebay and Google is responsible for a popular misconception that foreigners are shut out of China’s foreign internet market. This may be true of wholly-owned foreign operating firms, but foreign investors have poured billions of dollars into Chinese internet firms. China’s big three – Tencent, Baidu and Alibaba – are entrepreneur-founded, foreign venture-capital-backed, overseas-listed firms. South African multimedia company Naspers owns approximately 35% of Tencent, while Yahoo and Japan’s Softbank own a majority of Alibaba Group. Google was a pre-IPO investor in Baidu before it exited with a handsome profit. Almost all of China’s major internet firms are classified as foreign-invested entities, which in theory means they are subject to the same restrictions as Yahoo, Google or any other foreign firm. Most foreign internet companies have failed in China because they were unable to compete effectively against very talented local competition, not because they were shut out of the market.

Over the past few years, however, Beijing’s decision to increase its controls over internet content hit a handful of high-profile foreign internet businesses targeting the Chinese market. The change occurred in 2008, possibly triggered by Beijing’s paranoid preparations for the Olympics and unfavorable foreign coverage of the riots in Tibet, when websites such as Facebook and Youtube were first blocked. Since then, the government has taken a much more aggressive regulatory role, declaring certain sectors like online video off limits to new investment by non-state-owned entrants, and launching a proactive campaign to guide public opinion online. June’s white paper states that the internet must serve the interests of both the economy and the state.

So far, private domestic players have not suffered. But with the Party-state’s propaganda machine and billions of dollars at stake, government media outlets are beefing up their online presence. CCTV, the state-owned television broadcaster, has launched an online TV service that may eventually threaten the more established online video sites like Youku and Tudou, which have tens of millions of viewers every month. People’s Daily, the Party-controlled newspaper, recently restructured its online division into a new company, which is planning to list on the Shanghai stock exchange before the end of 2010. People’s Daily Online has also launched a search engine – Goso.cn – that aspires to compete with the likes of Baidu. Nine other state-owned media firms have been approved to list their online arms on the Chinese stock market.

Whether these state media enterprises can attract a critical mass of users is uncertain, but China’s propagandists are determined to give state-run media outlets a greater role in shaping online debate. Writing in the Party journal Seeking Truth in December 2009, Meng Jianzhu, the Minister of Public Security, wrote: “The internet has become a primary method for the anti-China forces to infiltrate us and amplify destructive energy. This provides new challenges in maintaining state security and social stability.” Censorship of foreign content has shifted from news sites to Web 2.0 services with superior communication and organizing functions, such as Twitter and Facebook, which the government accuses of becoming a rallying point for dissidents and separatists. A report on new media published by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in July bluntly states: “Foreign social networking sites have become a tool for political subversion used by Western nations.”

Control 2.0

Tech-savvy netizens can easily sidestep the Great Firewall with VPNs, proxy servers and other special software. But most of China’s 400m plus internet users stay within filtered Chinese sites, partly for cultural and linguistic reasons, but also because circumventing the government’s controls is simply inconvenient. Chinese internet companies are forced to sign government-mandated “self discipline” pledges, and large firms employ dozens or hundreds of censors who monitor content and remove anything of concern. Failure to comply leads to warnings, fines, shutdowns or worse. The government provides guidance on restricted topics but has structured enough ambiguity into the system so that company censors frequently overcompensate in their efforts to comply. The rise of social networking sites – especially Twitter-like microblogs such as Sina’s Weibo, which has an estimated 20m users [approximately 100m at the time of this blog posting] – have dramatically increased the filtering tasks. Sina’s chief editor complains that policing Sina’s microblogs is “a very big headache.”

Rebecca MacKinnon, an expert on Chinese internet censorship, calls the government’s approach to information control “networked authoritarianism.” By allowing citizens enough freedom to draw attention to social problems or injustices, she argues, they become less likely to join a movement calling for radical political change. “In many ways,” McKinnon explains, “the regime actually uses the internet not only to extend its control but also to enhance its legitimacy.” Aside from being a societal pressure valve, the internet is a useful means for the central government to supervise wayward local officials. Indeed, June’s white paper explicitly states that the government “attaches great importance to the internet’s role in supervision.”

Beijing, in other words, has a political interest in keeping China’s internet commercially healthy. Observers who predicted a decade or more ago that China’s political and economic structures were unsustainable and the country would imminently “crash” were wrong. And contemporary analysts who believe that the relatively closed nature of China’s internet will lead to the downfall of the Party-state will likely be proved wrong, too. Chen Yun, a Party elder who spent much of his career overseeing the economy, advocated the idea of a “birdcage economy” for China. The cage was the state economic plan, within which free markets – the birds – could move freely. China’s approach to managing the internet is similar: the government has built a gilded cage around the internet that will prove far more robust than its critics expect.

For more frequent China-related updates you can follow me on Weibo @billbishop and on Twitter @niubi.

Related posts:

  1. Sinica Podcast: Does China Have A Second Internet Bubble?
  2. The Rise of China’s Cybercrats
  3. Detailed AllThingsD Report Claims Facebook Partnering With Baidu To Enter China
  4. Internet May Be The Largest Industry In China Not Dominated By State-Owned Firms
  5. Baidu Entering Microblogging Market With Upcoming Launch Of Baidu Weibo
Tags: ,,

Yellow Pages Opt-Out: 6 less phonebooks to recycle

The Great Yellow Pages Opt-Out (https://www.catalogchoice.org/catalogs/search)

Every year, they show up in droves. Piles of them, looking withered from the sun, the rain and the snow. They lay scattered, useless and limp, left to fend for themselves. No one wants them. They are helpless. They are phone books.

 

How much do the people of Seattle not want these chunks of advertising and (we hear) phone numbers? So much that last fall, the City passed two ordinances, spearheaded by Councilmember Mike "The Hot One" O'Brien, which, according to a press release we received today, mandated that "the phone book industry honor residents’ choice regarding what is delivered to their home."

Beginning tomorrow, the City is offering residents and businesses an online registry (we've been assured that it is both free and simple, so tell your Nana not to worry) to opt out of the phone book delivery.
The cost of not opting out? According to the City, two million phone books are recycled in every year-- at a cost of about $350,000 to Seattle Public Utilities ratepayers

xiaolongbao....it's just a dumpling

X
iaolongbao, like pizza, is one of those divisive foods that's almost too annoying to talk about. Everyone has an OPINION, and everyone is RIGHT, and everyone ELSE is a degenerate hayseed with the palate of a sucking chest wound. See, because Sally-Sue had them in New York and those are the real ones, but Jammy-Josh went to this place in L.A. and those are the best ones, and Marky-Mark is disgusted that anyone would ever eat xiaolongbao outside of Vancouver because, um, he cares about authenticityyyyy?, and fuck you all because Frankie-Fronk flies all the way to Shanghai every day on his lunch break but go ahead and eat rancid baby socks stuffed with pork-flavored clay if that's what you're into.

People.

Listen.

It's just a dumpling.

25 ways e-readers can't beat books | OregonLive.com

From Evernote:

25 ways e-readers can't beat books | OregonLive.com

Clipped from: http://www.oregonlive.com/books/index.ssf/2010/09/25_ways_e-readers_cant_beat_bo.html

25 ways e-readers can't beat books

Published: Saturday, September 18, 2010, 4:08 AM

1. The book unites delivery device and content. E-readers, drained of battery power, revert to hunks of plastic. 

2. The book begets libraries and independent bookstores, irreplaceable bastions of culture and community. 

3. The book, beyond cover price, comes with no proprietary fee. Your preferred e-reader sets you back at least $100. 

4.
 The book is not an inventory portal, therefore not subject to proprietary restrictions in content; e.g.: Due to licensing or discretionary considerations, "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley cannot be downloaded to this e-reading device. 

5. The book is not a brand, therefore is free from functional limitations imposed by a manufacturer; e.g.: The e-book you're requesting is not supported by your e-reader's operating system. Upgrade to our newest e-reader or follow this link to our checkout to download OS-2011.5. 

6. 
The book functionally withstands excessive dust, direct sunlight, splashed soup or dropped potatoes. 

7. The book is hard to eradicate except by fire. Is any e-reading device likely to reach -- with zero loss of content -- an age comparable to civilization's oldest incunabula? 

8. The book, presented as gift, shows regard for the recipient's tastes, being a single selection and/or bearing the giver's handwritten inscription. 

9. The book can be autographed by its author. 

10. The book, by conspicuous display of title and/or author, occasions conversation between mutually inclined strangers. 

11. 
The book may be safely read in the bath. 

12. The book relieves you of the screen in an age of relentless screen-media assaults upon the eye. 

13. The book is not an immediate access point for innumerable diversions (e-mail, video games, etc.). 

14. The book's printed editions are traceably distinct, a defense against manipulations of fact or history. 

15. 
The book does not "transmit and receive," except in mysterious ways. No need to fear an Orwellian eye embedded in the page. 

16.
 The book cannot be "swiped remotely" by the powers that be. 

17.
 The book's publisher may go broke without imperiling access to additional content. 

18. The book, bought secondhand or borrowed, yields up fascinating ephemera: grocery lists, love notes, locks of hair, receipts, etc., bringing the reader into poignant contact with an unknown fellow human being. 

19. The book complements your mantelpiece. 

20. The book boasts many practical uses beyond communication (as furniture, makeshift stairs, etc.). E-readers -- oddly shaped and breakable -- are as obsolescent as other computer junk by the time they quit working. 

21. The book is not invariably the product of offshore manufacturing (i.e., in China). 

22. The book accommodates ingenuity of format: children's books, art books, illuminated texts, pop-up books, fold-out maps, etc. 

23. The book makes a meaningful heirloom. 

24.
 The book may be safely left unattended on the beach. 

25.
 The book is not a shopping cart. 

-- M. Allen Cunningham

Understatement of the day

Insider-Trading Suspect Smashed Evidence 

The U.S. opened a new front in a sprawling insider-trading case, unveiling criminal charges against two former hedge-fund managers at giant SAC Capital Advisors—one of whom allegedly ripped up his computer drives with pliers after reading a Wall Street Journal report on the probe late last year.

The fund manager who destroyed the computer gear later dumped the pieces in four separate garbage trucks around New York City the night the article ran, the criminal complaint says.

"When people frantically begin shredding sensitive documents and deleting computer files and smashing flash drives and chasing garbage trucks at 2 a.m. ... it is not because they have been operating legitimately," said Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.

 

http://goo.gl/9vqEA