White House launches new digital government strategy - O'Reilly Radar - 0 views
Topshop to Debut Customizable, Shoppable Livestream During London Fashion Week - 4 views
-
"Viewers will not only be able to click on clothes and accessories to browse color options in real-time, they'll also be able to change the music, download the show soundtrack from iTunes, snap screenshots to share instantly on Facebook (a feature that was developed with in-house Facebook engineers), cut and share video clips, and order looks and makeup appearing on the catwalk."
Online platform aims to make household management easier | Springwise - 1 views
The Nike+ House of Innovation Experience | Digital Buzz Blog - 0 views
-
cool brand experience that is made up of a handful of challenges, exhibitions and environments that converge the physical and digital retail space for "everyday athletes" as they compete against each other and interact with the environment filled with some of Nike's most innovative products and technologies
Seedio is an app that syncs multiple iOS speakers together | Ubergizmo - 1 views
-
"While Seedio might not be able to boost the volume on your iPhone's speakers, it will instead allow you to beam the song you're currently playing on your iPhone to other iOS devices on the same WiFi network who also have Seedio installed, essentially turning all iOS devices in the room/house into one giant unified speaker. "
Embed Links In Facebook Photos With ThingLink Tabs - 0 views
-
Plus accounts include one Facebook page and 500 image uploads per month for $5 monthly, while Pro accounts, at $20 per month, cover five Facebook pages and include unlimited images. ThingLink added that its users include Van Halen, Gucci Maine, Blink-182, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio), Canadian newspaper National Post, British comedian Alan Partridge, and the U.K. music weekly NME.
Why the Internet Freaked Out When Fox Pulled House from Hulu - 0 views
-
Many observers immediately labeled Fox's block a violation of the principle of "network neutrality"—the idea that Internet service providers should allow subscribers to access all legal content online. Neutrality rules have been the subject of fierce debate in Washington, and activists are constantly on the lookout for perceived anti-neutrality maneuvering.
AdvertisementIf Fox's move violated "neutrality," though, it wasn't in the way we've long defined that term. Advocates for net neutrality rules have mainly been concerned about the power that cable and phone companies can exert on the Internet. The theory is that in most local areas, broadband companies exist as monopolies or duopolies—you can get the Internet from your phone company or your cable company—and, therefore, are in a position to influence online content. What if, for instance, AT&T demanded that YouTube pay a surcharge every time a customer watches a video? To prevent such abuses, the Federal Communications Commission imposed Internet "openness" guidelines (PDF) in 2005, and since then regulators and lawmakers have been arguing about how to make those guidelines both permanent and enforceable.
But this Fox-Cablevision-Hulu scenario turns the neutrality debate on its head. Here, it wasn't the broadband company—Cablevision—that blocked customers' access to content. Instead, it was the content company, Fox, that imposed the ban. Why is that distinction important? Because while it's easy to think of justifications for imposing neutrality regulations on broadband companies, it's less clear how we should feel about imposing rules on content providers. Telecom companies are regulated by the FCC, and there's a long history of the government forcing "openness" rules on public communications infrastructure. If the government can prohibit phone companies from deciding whom you can and can't call, shouldn't we have a similar rule preventing ISPs from deciding what you can get on the Web?