Developer API for Google+: It’s coming
Developer API for Google+: It really is coming
by Rafe Needleman
Google’s new social network, Google+, has only been public for two days, and developers are already thinking about access towards the service so they are able to roll out add-ons and enhancements.
Luckily for them, and ultimately for Google+ users, developer access is coming. It is simply a matter of time. As Vic Gundotra, senior vice president of social for Google, told me at a Internet 2.0 Summit cocktail celebration tonight, “I’m a developer guy at the core. It truly is inconceivable I would assemble some thing with out a platform.”
Vic Gundotra, Senior Vice-President of Social for Google.
(Credit: Julie Blaustein)
Gundotra worked for 15 years at Microsoft prior to leaving for Google. His final job there was as basic manager of platform evangelism. It is fair to say he’s got the background for setting up systems that developers can create upon.
However it just isn’t surprising that Google+ launched with no developer access. The service is far from completely baked. “We’re just finding started out!” Gundotra gushed to me when we talked. The features and functions of Google+ will most likely transform substantially in brief order. Much more functions will probably be absolutely be additional to the service, at the same time as increased integration with other Google apps. Giving developers access now might be premature, as some may well assemble solutions that finish up duplicating attributes that Google itself is just about to layer into the publicly obtainable service.
But opening up Google+ to developers sooner or later could enable all manner of add-ons and improvements, from third-party access apps, like Tweetdeck was for Twitter (ahead of Twitter acquired it); to Zynga-like games that access the Google social graph; to other utilities and add-ons. Personally, I’d prefer to see a utility that tends to make more quickly perform of managing and sorting contacts into circles.
Google is collecting names from developers who desire to know when the company launches developer tools. There’s an e-mail and Google Group sign-up on the web now.
Read extra: http://news.cnet.com/8301-19882_3-20075974-250/developer-api-for-google-its-coming/#ixzz1Qq5niq00
Post with 3 notes
Osama Bin Laden’s Smaller City Hideout Will get Google Maps Therapy
By Ian Paul, PCWorld May possibly two, 2011 6:03 AM
Graphic: Diego AguirreGoogle Maps enthusiasts have been in complete satire mode composing reviews for what might be the internet site wherever American forces killed Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Shortly immediately after President Obama spoke to your nation on Sunday, persons scoured Google’s satellite imagery and arrived up with what might really effectively be the hideout where by the al-Qaeda leader was remaining. The purported Bin Laden web site on Google Maps seems like a large estate surrounded by large security walls, just like the description of your compound displaying up in news reports.
No matter whether or not it’s the real spot, Google Maps customers are already acquiring pleasurable composing scathing evaluations for the former property in the world’s most well known terrorist. “Heat sources are undeniable. This put is blazing!” mentioned 1 reviewer. “Cold and drafty during the night, walls brimming with holes,” stated a different. A a lot more helpful review stated, “Free HBO, but ‘death to America!’ chants have been gaining outdated. Greater solutions nearby.”
An additional Maps consumer went to town posing as Bin Laden and offering a critique of several web pages while in the Pakistani town the al-Qaeda founder identified as property. “Love that bloomin’ onion appetizer but it goes directly to my thighs,” fake Bin Laden claimed of Abottabad’s Red Onion restaurant. With regards to the close by Cannt Police Station, the satirical account explained, “friendly employees.” Discussing his former household, fake Bin Laden said, “great hideout would use once again.”
Twitter News Network
Social Media seems to have played a giant element in disseminating news about Bin Laden. Keith Urbahn, former chief of workers for Bush Administration Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, received the credit score as the initially individual to leak the news on Twitter previous to any from the news companies acquired the possibility. This led to quite a few critics declaring which was a watershed minute for Twitter. Company Insider named it Twitter’s CNN minute, a reference to your news channel’s famed coverage of your 1st Gulf War. But Urbahn Monday early morning downplayed the importance of his leak. ” Up to I feel in rise of ‘citizen journalism,’ weblogs, twitter etc supplanting regular media,” Urbahn stated. “My tweet isn’t really wonderful proof of it.” Urbahn noted he acquired the knowledge about Bin Laden’s death from a Tv news producer, a member with the so-called mainstream media.
Interestingly, an IT consultant dwelling in Abbottabad appears to get unwittingly reside tweeted the American forces raid on Bin Laden’s compound. Sohaib Athar (@ReallyVirtual on Twitter) complained of loud helicopters and explosions overheard during the night inside the smaller Pakistani city. You’ll be able to find a complete timeline of Athar’s tweets here. It appears Athar’s fifteen minutes of around the world fame are currently sporting skinny around the IT advisor. “Bin Laden is dead. I failed to kill him. Please let me rest now,” Athar tweeted early Monday in response on the mind-boggling media awareness his tweets have acquired.
Link with Ian Paul (@ianpaul) and Today@PCWorld on Twitter for your most up-to-date tech news and analysis.
Post with 1 note
Yahoo and google Confirms That It Fired Engineer For Breaking Inside Privateness Insurance policies
Jason Kincaid
8 hrs in the past
Previously currently Gawker printed an alarming report detailing the exploits of a former Yahoo and google engineer who allegedly utilized his inner clearances to accessibility personal Gmail and GTalk accounts to ensure he could spy on and harass individuals, which includes 4 minors. The write-up repeatedly factors out how a lot delicate information the public has entrusted Bing with, and highlights that the company’s inner safety insurance policies might not be adequate to retain that stability must a trusted personnel go rogue. Bing has just responded on the write-up with this statement, and it does not deny something Gawker reported:
“We dismissed David Barksdale for breaking Google’s strict interior privateness insurance policies. We very carefully manage the volume of staff who’ve accessibility to our programs, and we routinely upgrade our safety controls–for illustration, we’re appreciably rising the quantity of time we invest auditing our logs to make sure individuals controls are efficient. That mentioned, a constrained quantity of men and women will often need to have to discover these programs if we’re to operate them properly–which is why we take any breach so severely.”
Bill Coughran, Senior Vice President, Engineering, Yahoo and google
Although the Gawker post effectively mentioned that Barksdale received been fired for this motive, Bing possessed not previously confirmed it and Barksdale experienced refused to comment on why he experienced been dismissed.
In light from the information, we’ve asked Search engines for far more info as to how numerous instances such breaches have occurred within the previous, and the way numerous men and women have accessibility to those personal accounts. Update: A Bing spokesperson says that a comparable protection breach has occurred when prior to and that the worker was also dismissed. The earlier event didn’t have any minors concerned.
In accordance towards the Gawker report, Barksdale was a Internet site Reliability Engineer, who experienced deep obtain to personal accounts spanning several Yahoo providers.
Here’s 1 especially damning passage from the Gawker post:
It is unclear how widespread Barksdale’s abuses have been, but in no less than 4 scenarios, Barksdale spied on minors’ Yahoo and google accounts without having their consent, in accordance to a resource near on the incidents. In an event this spring involving a 15-year-old boy who he’d befriended, Barksdale tapped into phone logs from Yahoo and google Voice, Google’s World-wide-web telephone service, following the boy refused to inform him the title of his new girlfriend, in accordance to our supply. Right after accessing the kid’s account to retrieve her identify and cell phone range, Barksdale then taunted the boy and threatened to name her.
It is really worth noting that among Gawker’s sources says that the harassment was not sexual in nature, although it was “a great deal of violating people’s private privacy”.
Al Gorleoni?
Head of California’s Cap and Trade Offsets Program: Cap and Trade Won’t Work for Climate, It’s a Scam
Paul Krugman argues that cap and trade worked to reduce sulfur dioxide and stop acid rain, and so it will work to reduce C02.
However, two EPA lawyers with more than 40 years of cumulative experience - including the guy who has been head of California’s cap and trade offset programs for more than 20 years - say that sulfur dioxide was different, and that cap and trade for climate is a scam which only benefits the financial players.
Specifically, they point out that:
- Cap and trade was tried in Europe, but ended up raising energy prices, creating volatility, produced few greenhouse gas reductions, but made billions for the financial players
- Even the guy who invented the cap and trade concept doesn’t think it will work in regards to climate change (see this and this)
- Carbon offsets - which are part of the cap and trade plan - increase pollution
- One reason that offsets lead to more pollution is that investors fight to keep toxic chemicals legal, so they can make more money off of trading the offsets
- Like subprime mortgages and other creative financial instruments which brought us the economic crisis, carbon offsets lack integrity and don’t work (see this)
Worldchanging: Bright Green: Climate News Roundup
An online magazine covering tools, models, and ideas for building a better future.
Google Unveils New Format For Online News | paidContent
The initiative is Google’s latest to try to shake up how news is presented onlineâand it demonstrates again that despite some of the rhetoric the company is working closely with publishers. In September, the company unveiled another …
Sony confirms PSP Minis for PS3 // News
Sony has confirmed that PSP Minis will be compatible with the PlayStation 3 from December 17. The next PS3 firmware updat…
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Cap-and-Trade Is Not a Jobs Program [Greg Pollowitz]
Josh Barro of the Manhattan Institute has a good analysis of the recent “Green” summit at the White House. His conclusion:
But whatever it is, Cap and Trade is not a jobs program. This should be obvious. If the Obama Administration argued that we should further complicate the tax code, so as to create more jobs for lawyers and accountants, they would be laughed out of the room. The fact that people must work harder to comply with new regulations is a cost of such policies, not a benefit.
The Administration’s upside-down approach to job creation isn’t limited to the Green Jobs mirage. In his opening remarks at the jobs summit, Obama once again hailed Cash for Clunkers as a success the Administration should build on for future job creation. The program was a “success” inasmuch as the government successfully got consumers to accept $3 billion in free money. It was not a cost-effective economic growth or job creation measure — in fact, Edmunds.com estimates that it cost taxpayers $24,000 for every new car sale generated.
Not every idea advanced at the summit was bad — participants talked about the need to simplify regulations, improve American tax competitiveness, and increase openness of foreign markets. Even President Obama admitted that “true economic recovery is only going to come from the private sector.” But if Obama realizes the private sector must lead the recovery, why is he proposing to burden it with more taxes, more government spending, and more regulation? True economic recovery will only come when the Administration realizes that regulation does not create jobs.
12/08 10:05 AMShare
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Cap-and-Trade Is Not a Jobs Program [Greg Pollowitz]
Josh Barro of the Manhattan Institute has a good analysis of the recent “Green” summit at the White House. His conclusion:
But whatever it is, Cap and Trade is not a jobs program. This should be obvious. If the Obama Administration argued that we should further complicate the tax code, so as to create more jobs for lawyers and accountants, they would be laughed out of the room. The fact that people must work harder to comply with new regulations is a cost of such policies, not a benefit.
The Administration’s upside-down approach to job creation isn’t limited to the Green Jobs mirage. In his opening remarks at the jobs summit, Obama once again hailed Cash for Clunkers as a success the Administration should build on for future job creation. The program was a “success” inasmuch as the government successfully got consumers to accept $3 billion in free money. It was not a cost-effective economic growth or job creation measure — in fact, Edmunds.com estimates that it cost taxpayers $24,000 for every new car sale generated.
Not every idea advanced at the summit was bad — participants talked about the need to simplify regulations, improve American tax competitiveness, and increase openness of foreign markets. Even President Obama admitted that “true economic recovery is only going to come from the private sector.” But if Obama realizes the private sector must lead the recovery, why is he proposing to burden it with more taxes, more government spending, and more regulation? True economic recovery will only come when the Administration realizes that regulation does not create jobs.
12/08 10:05 AMShare
The need for a green revolution is here! The International Day of Climate Action in October, along with this week’s beginning of the Copenhagen United Nations Climate Summit, is the start of the global revolution. While reports are that no official binding progress will occur during this meeting, what is guaranteed is that people are paying attention.
Cap and trade is a scheme being bounced around by many people for a quick solution to our climate crisis. This system needs to have a thorough review process before we sign the dotted line, not just in our own country, but as a world in agreement.
Watch “The Story of Cap and Trade” (from “The Story of Stuff”) for an easy-to-understand guide as to why cap and trade is bad for climate change and our economy.
Video after the break:
Like Paul Krugman, I am puzzled by James Hansen’s piece in the NYT attacking cap and trade. Hansen writes:
Because cap and trade is enforced through the selling and trading of permits, it actually perpetuates the pollution it is supposed to eliminate. If every polluterâs emissions fell below the incrementally lowered cap, then the price of pollution credits would collapse and the economic rationale to keep reducing pollution would disappear.
Eh? If the system succeeded so well that emissions came in below the cap, that would be a problem? If cutting emissions is the goal, I can think of worse. And in that case, anyway, couldn’t you just lower the cap?
Hansen explains his objection in even simpler terms:
Still need more convincing? Consider the perverse effect cap and trade has on altruistic actions. Say you decide to buy a small, high-efficiency car. That reduces your emissions, but not your countryâs. Instead it allows somebody else to buy a bigger S.U.V. â because the total emissions are set by the cap.
Or consider the salutary effect cap and trade has on selfish actions. Say you decide to buy a big SUV. That increases your emissions, but not your country’s. Instead it obliges somebody else to buy a small high-efficiency car–because the total emissions are set by the cap.
Cap and trade, as Krugman points out, makes the price outcome uncertain (if it is allowed to bind). The carbon tax that Hansen appears to prefer makes the quantity of emissions uncertain. That is why those calling for strong action on greenhouse gases usually prefer cap and trade. Perhaps Hansen’s distaste for a market in emissions–somebody might make some money off this–is confusing him. But a tax would be mediated through a market too, obviously.
I’m for a carbon tax, because I would rather set the price than the quantity. It has other advantages too: it is harder to game and makes international co-operation on climate change easier to arrange. Cap and trade with a price collar, as proposed in the Senate bill, combines desirable elements of both, and might be the best way forward, on economic as well as political grounds.
But Hansen’s article makes no sense at all. Paraphrasing Wegman on the hockey stick, Bad reasoning + Correct Answer = Bad Economics.
They disagreed on whether the legislation currently in Congress has a chance at being passed, and the rate at which climate change is happening.
But the major sticking point was how much cap-and-trade will affect West Virginiaâs bottom line.
The âcap-and-tradeâ system currently being debated in Congress would allow industries to emit a certain amount of pollution. Companies that pollute more would have to buy credit from companies that pollute less. The theory is that companies that can cut back on their emissions will do so in order to save money.
David Hawkins is the director of climate programs at the Natural Resources Defense Council. He says the price of energy will go up. But weâll use energy more efficiently, so he argues ultimately it will cost less.
âAs consumers of fuels, and weâre talking about the consumer standpoint now, we donât actually value how many gallons of gasoline we get or how many thousand cubic feet of natural gas we get, Hawkins said.
âWhat we value is the comfort that we get from that energy. The convenience, the safety. Thatâs what we value. As Amory Lovins likes to say, hot showers and cold beer. Thatâs what we value.â
But Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute disagrees. He says that the goals set out by cap-and-tradeâan 83 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050âare impossible to meet, so cost is a moot point.Â
âNobody knows how much itâs going to cost because nobody knows how to do it,â he said. âHow do you put a price on something where you donât know what the object that youâre pricing is? Nobody can get you to 83 percent reduction in emissions with todayâs technology.â
The House of Representatives has already passed a climate bill, and proponents
of the legislation are prodding the Senate to do the same.
WTF? Cap and trade woman invented credit default swaps
Tuesday, 12/8/2009 - 11:56 am by Lynn Parramore | 2 CommentsBy now you know that risky derivatives, particularly credit default swaps, are the financial Frankenproducts that caused the economic meltdown.
But here’s something you might not know: Blythe Masters, the woman who invented CDSs, is now turning her genius to carbon trading at JP Morgan. A recent posting on Naked Capitalism shines a light on the danger of a carbon trading schemed centered around derivatives.
In an email to me this morning, Marshall Auerback noted that Copenhagen is looking like a “big boondoggle for Wall Street.” The climate change conference, he noted, is “dressed up as being wonderful for the environment, much as financial deregulation was celebrated as the ‘democratisation of credit’.”
Climate change Wall Street can believe in?
