The revolution will be open source

but which revolution?

Sometimes I stumble across an article that makes you mad and this is one that did that to me today: The revolution will be not open source

The ICT4D revolution will not be open source. It will be created by scrappy startups like these, by people who are unapologetic about building a business for the long term, and who have bet their very livelihoods on their ability to create tools that people actually want to use.  The article is published by DevResults, Herb Caudill and he refers to techchange: DevResults is just one of many mission-driven technology enterprises in the international development space. Magpiand iFormBuilder make mobile data collection software. TechChange has created an online technology learning platform for social change organizations. Souktel is doing interesting work on mobile money, knowledge sharing, and job matching.

My comment to the article:

I obviously do not agree, my dentist is using a wordpress website and using google calendar, the schools of my kids are using open source and the organisation I work for use open source as much as possible, I am using Ubuntu, Open Office, Android Open Source Project on my Phone and tablet, Kodi on my media player and postfix is delivering mail to whereever I am. Is that enough reason to conclude that the ICT4D revolution will be open source? No it is not, nor the other way around. And who is talking about a revolution anyway? we are talking about development and development based on paid proprietary software might be just expensive or will we do it on pirated software which is the current situation. Why can we just look at what is appropriate in the case we are dealing with?

But an interesting challenge for the near future.

Facebook admits privacy flaw impacted 6M of its users, leaking email addresses and telephone numbers

Forwarded read from RSS:Ken Yeung posted this on there website: read more This is a copy I posted here: 144527266 1 520x245 Facebook admits privacy flaw impacted 6M of its users, leaking email addresses and telephone numbers

Facebook revealed today on its Security blog that a bug may have caused information for 6 million users to be shared with others. It’s believed that people who have some contact information about a user could have had access to their email address or phone number.

Currently, the social network company says that there’s “no evidence” saying that the bug was for malicious intents and it has not received any complaints (until now) from any of its users. What’s more, Facebook has not seen any “anomalous behavior” on its platform to suggest any wrongdoing.

Here’s Facebook’s explanation for what happened:

When people upload their contact lists or address books to Facebook, we try to match that data with the contact information of other people on Facebook in order to generate friend recommendations. For example, we don’t want to recommend that people invite contacts to join Facebook if those contacts are already on Facebook; instead, we want to recommend that they invite those contacts to be their friends on Facebook.

Because of the bug, some of the information used to make friend recommendations and reduce the number of invitations we send was inadvertently stored in association with people’s contact information as part of their account on Facebook.

As a result, if a person went to download an archive of their Facebook account through our Download Your Information (DYI) tool, they may have been provided with additional email addresses or telephone numbers for their contacts or people with whom they have some connection. This contact information was provided by other people on Facebook and was not necessarily accurate, but was inadvertently included with the contacts of the person using the DYI tool.

There’s no specific timeframe on how long the bug has been around — Facebook only says that the bug report was brought to its attention “recently.” It moved to disable the DYI tool to resolve the issue and after the problem had been fixed to the company’s satisfaction, the tool was brought back online.

Facebook also touted its White Hat program to help it keep its security protocols up to snuff. It was through this initiative where the bug was discovered and the company says that it has paid the researcher a bounty for the discovery.

US, Canada, and European regulators have all been notified, according to the company. Users affected should be receiving an email from Facebook soon as the company says it’s in the process of doing so.

Photo credit: Manjunath Kiran/AFP/Getty Images

15 years of Ars: The time-shifts, tweets, and top speeds changing the world

Forwarded read from RSS:Sean Gallagher posted this on there website: read more This is a copy I posted here:

Aurich Lawson / Thinkstock

As you probably know, Ars is all about creating a scene. As we celebrate our 15th anniversary, we’re looking back at some of the people, companies, and technologies that have caused the biggest stirs in the past decade and a half. Today, the focus shifts to technological innovations that have radically changed—or promise to change—our digital lives.

A spirited editorial debate led to a consensus on three technologies: time-shifting of broadcast content, fiber-to-premises broadband services, and social networking. Each of these has directly or indirectly impacted the way we work, play, and interact with the world. The roots of each extend back to before Ars was a glimmer in Ken Fisher’s eye, but we’ll continue experiencing their effects for the foreseeable future.

Time-shifting (or why Jack Valenti is spinning in his grave)

Time-shifting content has been with us for a long time, driving the media industry nuts ever since the invention of the video cassette recorder. In 1982, Jack Valenti—then president of the Motion Picture Association of America—testified before Congress, saying, “The VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” (See the Ars series on TV for more Valenti rage.)

Read 76 remaining paragraphs | Comments