Group items tagged

The Anita Borg Institute has several initiatives to promote and celebrate women in technology. The 2010 Women of Vision awards celebrate women who have made significant achievements in 3 areas. For Innovation: Kathleen McKeown, Henry and Gertrude Rothschild Professor of Computer Science, Columbia University For Social Impact: Lila Ibrahim, General Manager, Emerging Markets Platform Group, Intel Corporation For Leadership: Kristina Johnson, Ph.D., Under Secretary for Energy at the Department of Energy This excerpt of a post from Katy Dickinson at SanJose.MetBlogs.com shows why this is important! "I have referred dozens of young women to the 2008 WOV talk by Helen Greiner. Any girl geek who feels too alone in her love of technology will be encouraged by the amazing founder of iRobot saying that when she was young "not one person told me I should be an Engineer" and "we need diversity of perspectives … more women's life experiences influencing our directions and designs".

This article discusses Austin Heap, a US citizen being awarded for his innovative program Haystack, which sidesteps Iran's heavy internet filtering through servers located elsewhere in the world. This article is important in today's internet censorship debate, as it promotes the awarding of individual's who openly seek ways around censorship.

This article discusses how Open Source is beginning to overtake proprietary software in leading technological innovation. Open source can be monetised by capitalising on the value created around Open Source.

A concise timeline of the World Wide Web. From the first domain right through to Twitter, it highlights major innovations and events in the development of the internet.

A summary of Matt Mullenweg's talk  in "The Economist Innovation Conference", about Wordpress and the importance of people behind Open Source.

Some great analysis and summary from Fast Company on Google pulling the plug on their Chinese search engine, and how this relates to their submission to the Australian Government regarding their proposed ISP filtering. If you're not familiar with Fast Company, this is how they modestly describe themselves: "Fast Company sets the agenda, charting the evolution of business through a unique focus on the most creative individuals sparking change in the marketplace. By uncovering best and "next" practices, the magazine and website help a new breed of leader work smarter and more effectively. Fast Company empowers innovators to challenge convention and create the future of business."

This article argues that reputation - such as in Apple's iPad - can be more important than need and functionality when it comes to technology. The phenomena of 'the fad' is not new, but is especially relevant with technological products and innovation. It will be interesting to see whether items such as the iPad do fill gaps in a market or are simply fad toys. The iPad's claimed 'killer function' - that of reading and subscriptions - will prove interesting when we look at how the publishing industry repsponds and whether standards much develop for newspapers/books/magazines.

Lessig talk about the internet being a innovative commons where allow creation to be made. There might be a new business model that online file sharing will eventually benefit than causing profit loss.

During a speech at the Media Institute in Washington [February 24, 2010], Larry Strickling, President Obama's top official at the Department of Commerce and administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), suggested that there should be policy discussions between government agencies, foreign governments and key Internet constituencies on issues such as privacy, child protection, cybersecurity, copyright protection and Internet governance. "It's now time to respond to all the social changes being driven by the growth of the Internet," Strickling said. "We need Internet Policy 3.0. We enter this new decade recognizing that we rely on the Internet for essential social purposes: health, energy efficiency, and education. It's also a general engine for economic and social innovation. We must take rules more seriously if we want full participation, but we must keep the need for flexibility in mind."

BROADCASTERS will be able to air extra advertising on their digital free-to-air channels and erase breaches of the rules governing free-to-air TV if they swiftly correct errors, under significant concessions given by the communications watchdog.

Another case in which intellectual property rights come into question. Apple is suing HTC for infringement of 20 Apple patents. It is interesting to note, that the majority of handsets which been specified in this case are powered by Google's Android operating system which is open source. I feel that corporations using open sources to power their products need to consider the potential repercussions. Although open source communities tend to operate with an ethic of contribution and collaborative innovation; it is inevitable that ideas and the products which stem from it will crossover from one realm to another, which in turn will lead to a figurative 'stepping on one another's toes' and ensuing law suits. In saying this, it is clear that whether or not it is open source product or not, that cases like this have almost become a symptom of the modern tech-business climate.

We all know video content is one of the most popular types of content on the web, driving some of the most innovative and popular web based applications (for example Skype, ChatRoulette, YouTube). However, new video-centric applications, which combine real-time, social networking and broadcasting are putting an even more intense spotlight on questions of privacy than ever before. This particular article profiles examples that are surely just web minutes away from the tipping point, giving users the chance to broadcast their lives in ways Twitter can only dream of. Surprisingly, the article only touches on privacy issues, suggesting that we are too willing to post personal information about ourselves. Reader comments rightly point out we are moving into very murky territory where the attitude seems to be that anything posted on the web is fair game and can be used against the person who posted it.

What does it mean for both your privacy and personal reputation if you are putting everything online? If governments/corporations/employers etc can access so much personal information about you, how will this affect your life and the 'control' that such organisations have?

Privacy addressed by Zukerberg. Shall we believe him? Article goes hand in hand with this week's readings.