Family Learning Center

Posts Tagged ‘Pundits’

What Google Will Do in China (SXSW Presentation)

Kaiser Kuo presented today at SXSW about Google in China. He spoke about how the Google situation will impact Chinese Internet users, other companies and the Chinese government.

In the presentation, Kuo (who also spoke to ReadWriteWeb a week ago) clarified how censorship in China works. Contrary to popular belief, it is not the Great Firewall that has the most impact in China – but something China calls "self-discipline." Kuo also discussed what the next moves will be from Google, since he believes that the ball is in Google’s court and Beijing won’t push the situation.

Sponsor

History of Google in China

Before getting down to the nitty gritty of the current Google-China standoff, Kaiser Kuo gave some valuable context to Google in China.

In 2005 Google started to hire aggressively in China, he said. Google’s decision to enter China with a censored product immediately brought grief to Google, with some pundits describing it as a "black day for Internet freedom." Google defended its actions at that point by saying that not providing search to a fifth of the world’s population would be a greater loss than having censored results.

At first Google had a notice on their search results stating that they were censored. Kuo also pointed out that Google only omitted results that users wouldn’t have been able to view anyway had they clicked through (because the pages or sites were blocked). At that point, Google didn’t host Gmail, personal search history, Blogger or other services that had personal information. Google in China also protected their employees, Kuo noted.

Google never had an easy time of it in China. For example, many Chinese users couldn’t spell the word "Google." Regulators made it difficult for them, as did their Chinese competitors. Google did manage to make good revenues and market share, but never "moved the needle" against its Chinese search competitor Baidu. Kuo remarked that Google was not singled out for any special treatment by the Chinese government.

In 2009 Google got into trouble due to pornography in its search results, and it went dark for a short time as a result.

There has been a massive growth in Internet users in China in the four years since Google entered that market. There were 2-3 million Internet users in China when Google began operations there; now there are 384 million Internet users in China. Google has around 35% market share in China, which has not been matched by any other Western company. Its annual revenues in China is around $300-400 million in revenue, which is nothing to sneeze at.

In mid-December 2009 there was a hacker attack on Google, which in January Google claimed on its blog came from China. At that time Google also announced it would stop censoring search results on google.cn. Kuo doesn’t believe this announcement was a cynical retreat from China due to its being defeated by Chinese competitors, which many pundits suggested at the time.

Kuo said that the challenge to Google’s business model is around trust, for personal data in the cloud. So Google’s blog post in China was appropriate, Kuo believes.

Some people have suggested that the Chinese government used the strategy known in China as "Using Quiescience to control action." The government has however unblocked Google Docs and Groups, and has not blocked any further Google services since January.

Currently Google is still hiring in China and is in the midst of negotiations with the Chinese government. Kuo believes there is deliberate confusion right now."It’s impossible to grasp what Google is up against without having a better grasp of how censorship in China works."

The Great Firewall

There are two main types of Internet censorship in China, said Kuo.

The first is The Great Firewall of China, which has been nick-named "Iron Curtain 2.0." It’s a system of filters at domain name or page level. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Blogger and other western sites have been blocked at this level. Kuo said that it’s fairly simple for Chinese Internet users to "hop the firewall " using proxy services, free VPNs.

So The Great Firewall is more of an inconvenience. Kuo pays for a VPN that allows him to access Western websites.

Self-Discipline

The second form of censorship is "more pernicious and effective," according to Kuo. It is carried out by Internet companies, on instructions from Chinese government. All Internet sites in China have to practice what is termed "self-discipline."

Failing to adhere to this form of censorship means having your website or service shut down. There are some 30,000 "Internet police." Two cartoon avatars are wont to show up if a Chinese user visits pages with content offensive to the Chinese government.

Most Internet users in China don’t come across the Great Firewall, because most Chinese Internet users don’t use Western services like Twitter and Facebook. But, Kuo said, "Google is different." It has become "a real part of the Internet culture in China."

Kuo then talked about how Chinese censorship nowadays is almost all social media sites, such as social networks and microblogging sites.

How Chinese Netizens Use The Internet

Kuo mentioned that the Chinese Internet is more "entertainment superhighway" than "information superhighway." Online gaming is big in China. Most Chinese Internet users, Kuo said, enjoy the Internet that they have – rather than worry about the one that Western pundits think they should have.

The Internet has also emerged as a de-facto public sphere in China. As long as you don’t overstep certain boundaries (political activism and so forth), then the "will of the masses" is often expressed on the Internet through the likes of bulletin boards or social networks.

Regularly, Chinese netizens are exposing public officials. However Kuo warns that there are "very very serious limits" to what is emerging in the public sphere. For example, anonymity leads to a lot of trolling. It’s ad-hoc, reactive and informal – however it is a "squeaky wheel that is regularly getting grease." Also, a minority are pro-democracy – most of the netizens in the public sphere are pro-Chinese government.

Next Moves from Beijing and Google

Kuo said that the Chinese government will wait for Google to make the next move. It realises it has nothing to gain by pushing Google or being openly hostile. The ball is in Google’s court and it will probably keep to its word that it will stop censorship in China. It may still shut down operations in China, which in practice means closing google.cn. But this has a lot of problematic scenarios – including the difficulty of having translations done for Google.com and staffing issues of closing down.

The pros of pulling out of China include saving face and appeasing western users. But the cons are significant. They include a backlash from tech-savvy, urban Google users, a setback to scientific research, a global black eye for their image, and ceding the virtual monopoly in search in China to Baidu.

The moderate scenario is that Google.cn is shut down, but continues to work with its mobile partners in China, R&D and sales continue to operate in China, and Google services will be unblocked.

The best case scenario, Kuo believes, would be if Google stopped censoring google.cn – but the service stays online.

Discuss

Read the whole story…

Talkcast tonight, 10 pm ET: Macworld Expo preview

Filed under: Macworld, TUAW Business, Podcasts

We’re back live tonight with the usual gang of ruffians, this time (partially) live from San Francisco as we warm up for Macworld Expo 2010! So what if the iPad isn’t out for a few more weeks? We’re revved up for the show — it’s our first year with a booth of our own, and our first year livestreaming video directly from the expo floor — so what we need now is to hear from you. What coverage do you want to see, which products do you want reviews, who are the pundits and industry veterans you want to hear from? C’mon & call the show to let us know.

We’ll kick things off at 10pm Eastern (7pm Pacific); hopefully the Superbowl will be over by then, and if not, we’ll vamp. Once you sign in on Talkshoe, you’ll be able to call in with your own phone and chat live with TUAW bloggers and listeners. See you then!

To participate on TalkShoe, you can use the browser-only client, the embedded Facebook app, or the classic TalkShoe Pro Java client; however, for maximum fun, you should call in. For the web UI, just click the “TalkShoe Web” button on our profile page at 10 pm Sunday. To call in on regular phone or VoIP lines (take advantage of your free cellphone weekend minutes if you like): dial (724) 444-7444 and enter our talkcast ID, 45077 — during the call, you can request to talk by keying in *8.

If you’ve got a headset or microphone handy on your Mac, you can connect via the free Gizmo or X-Lite SIP clients; basic instructions are here. Talk with you then!

TUAWTalkcast tonight, 10 pm ET: Macworld Expo preview originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Sun, 07 Feb 2010 18:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments
Read the whole story…

Analysts project iPad sales

Filed under: Apple Corporate, Hardware, Apple Financial

Some people hate it, some people love it and some people attempt to predict its future.* Members of the last group include Shaw Wu of Kaufman Brothers and Needham’s Charlie Wolf, both of whom are cautions about the iPad’s performance.

Wu brandishes the obvious like broadsword, noting that the Wi-Fi iPad will probably sell better than those with a data plan because it will cost less and that 3G users can expect slower speeds that those with Wi-Fi. He feels that Apple’s prediction of 10 million units sold in 2010 won’t be realized. Instead, Wu surmises, they’ll sell about 5 million.

Kaufman holds that the iPad is “…not a revolutionary product” that won’t take off without certain 3rd-party solutions, like books and customized iPad apps. His sales prediction is even more conservative than Wu’s at 4 million units sold.

They both like the entry price however, and we agree with them there. When the pundits were saying $1,000 before the announcement, we knew that wouldn’t jibe with Steve’s ambition to get one in as many homes as possible. Wu notes that the displays alone may be costing Apple $100 each, yet they’ve been very aggressive with the pricing.

Here’s my prediction: Apple will sell a mountain of these things and by this time next year, the nay-sayers will be downloading Humble Pie 1.0.

*But none have USED it, so let’s keep that in mind.

TUAWAnalysts project iPad sales originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments
Read the whole story…

In praise of the iPad: A contrarian view

Filed under: iPod Family, iPhone

If there has been an editorial theme about the iPad over the last few days, it’s been this: it disappoints. Pundits and consumers alike have been underwhelmed by the name (I mean, seriously, does anyone in the product naming department use feminine hygiene products? How many of these devices are going to be named “Max”?), by the physical design (Can you say “Un-Ives-like Bezel” three times fast?), by the missing features (no camera, no multitasking, still no Flash), and so forth. And yet, despite these seeming flaws, I’m wildly enthusiastic about the tablet. I think part of that enthusiasm is attributable to the fact that I’m a dyed-in-the-wool netbook user… and we are the actual target audience for the device.

Steve Jobs laid out the raison d’etre for the tablet right at the start of his presentation. Apple was going after the part of the market that wanted light computing: more than a phone could deliver and less involved than a laptop demanded. Ergo, the netbook. The list of things in the middle column of his main slide reflected the exact way that netbook users operate: checking the mail, surfing the web, enjoying some media. That’s exactly how my parents use their netbook, how my friends do, how I do. We’re coffee-shop, hotel, and passenger-seat netbook users. To that, you can add city commuters and airline passengers among those who have driven the netbook craze.

Netbooks are great. They are small, they are insanely cheap, and they offer just enough functionality to get a few things done without jumping into serious work that would demand a full-sized screen and keyboard. I know approximately three badzillion netbook users, and with very few exceptions, they are all Windows users.
I emphasize the Windows users part because nearly everyone filling that auditorium on Wednesday and nearly every blog author writing about the tablet is not, in fact, a primary Windows user. Apple events tend to draw Apple people. And for many reasons, I think that the Apple netpad (Isn’t that a much better name than “iPad”?) is a better match for Windows users deciding between an Asus or an Eee or an HP or an Apple unit than it is for people who are living and loving the Apple laptop life.

That’s because the new Apple nettop (and there you have another alternative that they could have considered) is not a laptop and it’s not meant to be one. It doesn’t multitask. It doesn’t run Adobe’s Creative Suite. Hell, it doesn’t even do Flash video. It is, in fact, an oversized iPod touch. And for those of us who love the touch, who really feel that iPhoneOS had brought near-netbook mobility, the iPad takes that promise even closer to where it could be.

The win for netbooks isn’t full computing power. Even though nearly every netbook on the market delivers that power, it’s rarely if ever used except when the netbook is docked to a display and keyboard; to be frank, that’s not the normal way most people use their netbooks. No, it’s about convenience. Users pull them out, use them for a few minutes, and then put them away as they sip their venti mocha lattes. Netbooks are second computers for nearly everyone I know, not primary ones.

When you need to get real, serious work done, there are laptops and there are desktop units. And Apple makes some of the best and sells them at a premium. But the netbook isn’t about providing the same solutions as a laptop. It’s about affordable convenience and mobility.

Almost two years ago, I wrote the following on TUAW:

The computing world is changing. We’re no longer tied to desktops. We move around, we take our computing with us. Holding a computer in the crook of our arms isn’t just a nice idea, it’s practical. When you’re walking through hospital halls, sitting in on a University lecture, attending business meetings, or spec’ing out a project at a construction site, the tablet computer makes sense. If anything, the iPhone which has been pushed far beyond its original design specs, has proven that people want truly mobile computing. No keyboard, no standard screen — true portability.

The iPad, with its larger screen, improved multitouch interface, and expanded software delivers on that promise: better movie screen space (especially on the train, in the car, or on the treadmill), better web browsing and e-mail reading, better viewing of photos, charts, and other data. And on top of that, it plays games and offers an eBook reader, not to mention you can use it for business presentations, either on the device itself or by sending video out to component, composite, or VGA-ready screens. And, not for nothing, a four-year-old can use it as easily as an octogenarian can. Literally as well as figuratively.

In comparison to a laptop, anyone who wanted the tablet to be an Air mini is going to be disappointed. But in comparison to a netbook? The iPad is made of win. The iPad delivers enough functionality to make it a a strong competitor to traditional netbooks. There is, however, that missing Flash thing. It’s a big issue for most Windows users I know (possibly because they’re used to the relatively smooth Flash performance on the Windows side, as opposed to the doggedly awful performance on the Mac side), as is the relative dearth of enterprise-ready solutions — problems the iPhone has already weathered for two years. But somehow the iPhone has managed to find its market despite those potential pitfalls. The iPad can as well.

As I wrote in 2008, “Cell phones and tablet computers are all about freeing ourselves.” Free yourself from the table, from the desk, and from the power cord. That’s what the iPad delivers.

TUAWIn praise of the iPad: A contrarian view originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments
Read the whole story…

Wolfram|Alpha: The Use Cases

Earlier this year at the SemTech conference in San Jose, I sat down with Wolfram|Alpha’s Russell Foltz-Smith. Wolfram|Alpha bills itself as a "computational knowledge engine," a nerdy and unfortunately not very intuitive description. Because it’s hard to grok, most people have categorized Wolfram|Alpha as a new type of search engine. The site got a lot of press when it launched in May, as many pundits saw it as a challenger to Google. However in our own extensive tests of the product before launch, we concluded that it isn’t a "Google Killer" and that it has more in common with Wikipedia.

Even now there is still confusion about what Wolfram|Alpha is and what its main use cases will be. In this interview with Russell Foltz-Smith, we discuss what people are using Wolfram|Alpha for now; and more importantly what its uses will be in the near future.

Sponsor

Editor’s note: This story is part of a series we call Redux, where we’ll re-publish some of our best posts of 2009. As we look back at the year – and ahead to what next year holds – we think these are the stories that deserve a second glance. It’s not just a best-of list, it’s also a collection of posts that examine the fundamental issues that continue to shape the Web. We hope you enjoy reading them again and we look forward to bringing you more Web products and trends analysis in 2010. Happy holidays from Team ReadWriteWeb!

Wolfram|Alpha: What is it Good For?

Wolfram|Alpha is a product that was built on top of founder Stephen Wolfram’s Mathematica product, a software tool for mathematicians that was initially released in 1988. The aim is to allow users to type human-like statements and have computations done on those. Wolfram|Alpha was first conceived and started development about 4 years ago, and just 6-8 months ago the team gave serious consideration to taking the product to a wider consumer audience.

I started out by asking Foltz-Smith what the Wolfram|Alpha team thought of all the media hype around their product, particularly about the "Google Killer" theme which many media outlets reveled in. Foltz-Smith replied that they were expecting to be compared to Google, but not to that extent. Their team was a little surprised there wasn’t more discussion around Wolfram|Alpha’s similarities to Wikipedia and Freebase (although he noted that ReadWriteWeb certainly covered that!). Regarding the Google comparisons, Foltz-Smith said that they didn’t give into the hype – they stuck to what their goals were.

I remarked that many people still seem confused about what Wolfram|Alpha does and what it can be used for. Foltz-Smith said that people will use it for different things. The crux of the product though is that it allows people to compute and calculate things.

But will mainstream people use Wolfram|Alpha? Right now, it seems to be focused on mathematicians. Foltz-Smith replied that yes, eventually Wolfram|Alpha will find a mainstream audience. It has started specific, but it will go broader. First, he said, it has to "pass a test" with "serious users" – by which he means academics and computational users. If it’s useful for them, claimed Foltz-Smith, it will then go mainstream.

Use Case: Education

One real-world use case we talked about was using Wolfram|Alpha in education. Russell Foltz-Smith said that Wolfram|Alpha could be used to automatically generate problem sets for students, and then research those sets.

A recent article in education website Chronicle.com argued that Wolfram|Alpha may have a less desired effect: encouraging cheating and laziness in students. This is because Wolfram|Alpha not only solves complex math problems, it "also can spell out the steps leading to those solutions."

Stephen Wolfram told Chronicle.com that computer-algebra systems like Wolfram|Alpha actually improve education – because they allow students to explore complex problems on their own and intuitively determine how functions work, rather than just learn rote processes. Wolfram claimed that "it’s better to let them [students] stand on that platform and go further."

Either way, it’s clear that Wolfram|Alpha and similar computational software will force the education system to adapt and change. Students now have a new (and certainly easier to use, as it’s on the Web) platform on which to compute things. There’s no point in the education system pretending it doesn’t exist. If you’re interested in tracking the progress of Wolfram|Alpha in educational settings, there is a wiki devoted to ‘Teaching Undergraduate Math with Wolfram|Alpha.’

Use Case: Computational Journalism

This one was described to me as "anomaly spotting." For example with the current interest in swine flu news, Wolfram|Alpha could be used to fact-find and compute interesting trends. As Foltz-Smith described it, Wolfram|Alpha could "automatically enhance news."

Foltz-Smith noted that CNN and other major networks do this already (analyze data), but that it’s expensive to do. The end results on CNN are added value things like interactive maps and fancy diagrams. Wolfram|Alpha could make this type of data gathering and analysis presentation inexpensive and common place amongst all kinds of news operations – including good old blogs.

Use Case: Sports Watching

Imagine sitting in your sofa in the lounge, remote control in one hand and your favorite beverage in the other. You’re watching the Friday night game on TV, it’s a close game and you’re curious about which team has the better chance of winning. Why, check Wolfram|Alpha of course! In real time, Wolfram|Alpha could compute statistics about not just the history of the two teams – but the history of the location of the game, the weather, the season so far, etc.

As Foltz-Smith explained it, Wolfram|Alpha would be able to do "chained queries" – queries made up of multiple parts. For example: which quarterback had the best winning record in games played in the rain during the 1970s.

Other Use Cases

We also discussed medical and scientific use cases. Although there are early examples of Wolfram|Alpha in health, such as a nutrition label generator, Foltz-Smith was generally cautious about medical uses – because a lot of health data "can’t be wrong." He noted that in use cases like medical research, the issue of data fidelity is key. For example with the human genome, you have to take great care of that data and associated algorithms. Also he explained that as something like the human genome scales, how do you do QA?

Foltz-Smith admitted that the Wolfram|Alpha team is still working on these and similar issues. But they have a lot of people devoted to solving this problem. Some types of data could be crowdsourced, e.g. in linguistics, but other data needs different approaches.

Conclusion

It was interesting to hear about some of the potential uses of Wolfram|Alpha. We at ReadWriteWeb think this product has a promising future. If Web 2.0 was about creating data (user generated content, to use the most familiar term for this), then the next generation of the Web is all about using that data. Wolfram|Alpha is premised on using and computing data.

Let us know in the comments what use cases you see for Wolfram|Alpha, and whether you’re aware of similar computational web apps.

See also:

• Wolfram|Alpha: Our First Impressions
• Wolfram|Alpha in Action: Our Screenshots
• Mixed Emotions: Our First Hands-On Test Of Wolfram|Alpha
• Wolfram|Alpha Launch: Here’s What You Need to Know
• Wolfram Alpha Gets Its First Update

Discuss

Read the whole story…

Physicists calculate the end of Moore’s Law, clearly don’t believe in Moore’s Law

If you’re looking for pundits with an end date for Moore’s Law, you don’t have to look far. You also don’t have to look far to find a gaggle of loonies who just knew the world was ending in Y2K, so make of that what you will. The latest duo looking to call the demise of the processor mantra that has held true for two score comes from Boston University, with physicists Lev Levitin and Tommaso Toffoli asserting that a quantum limit would be achieved in around 75 to 80 years. Scott Aaronson, an attention-getter at MIT, expects that very same limit to be hit in just 20 years. Of course, there’s plenty of technobabble to explain the what’s and how’s behind all this, but considering that the brainiacs of the world can’t even agree with Gordon Moore’s own doomsday date, we’re choosing to plug our ears and keep on believin’ for now. Bonus video after the break.

[Via Slashdot]

Continue reading Physicists calculate the end of Moore’s Law, clearly don’t believe in Moore’s Law

Filed under: Desktops, Laptops, Science

Physicists calculate the end of Moore’s Law, clearly don’t believe in Moore’s Law originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments
Read the whole story…