Mark Zuckerberg says change the world, yet he sets the rules | Carole Cadwalladr | Opinion | The Guardian

one response to his letter is to think it’s inspiring, touching, even, that there’s a billionaire out there who wants to build an “infrastructure”, a word he uses 24 times, that “prevents harm, helps during crises and rebuilds afterwards”.But here’s another response: where does that power end? Who holds it to account? What are the limits on it? Because the answer is there are none. Facebook’s power and dominance, its knowledge of every aspect of its users’ intimate lives, its ability to manipulate their – our – world view, its limitless ability to generate cash, is already beyond the reach of any government.

Fuente: Mark Zuckerberg says change the world, yet he sets the rules | Carole Cadwalladr | Opinion | The Guardian

Mark Zuckerberg and philanthropy: it’s not like it was in Rockefeller’s day | Evgeny Morozov | Opinion | The Guardian

Mark Zuckerberg has ploughed funds into health and education but there’s a fine line between philanthropy and speculation

Fuente: Mark Zuckerberg and philanthropy: it’s not like it was in Rockefeller’s day | Evgeny Morozov | Opinion | The Guardian

Hackean las cuentas de Twitter, Linkedin y Pinterest de Mark Zuckerberg – El Mostrador

El grupo de piratas informáticos OurMine Team aseguró este fin de semana que había accedido a las cuentas de Zuckerberg en Twitter, Linkedin, Pinterest e Intagram.

Fuente: Hackean las cuentas de Twitter, Linkedin y Pinterest de Mark Zuckerberg – El Mostrador

Facebook celebra “un gran arranque de año” en el que triplica sus beneficios – El Mostrador

Los datos publicados este miércoles revelan la creciente importancia de la publicidad para dispositivos móviles, que representa ya el 82 % del total, frente al 73 % del mismo periodo del año anterior. Los resultados llegan después de que Apple anunciase ayer la primera caída de sus beneficios trimestrales en 13 años y de que Twitter y Google diesen a conocer números que no lograron satisfacer las expectativas de Wall Street.

Fuente: Facebook celebra “un gran arranque de año” en el que triplica sus beneficios – El Mostrador

Media groups face up to how tech groups now call the shots –

The threat of being disrupted by a couple of young technology entrepreneurs with a smart idea has long been something that keeps leaders of established industries awake at night. But what happens when those geeks from the garage have the power and wealth of the world’s most powerful companies at their disposal — and they are moving with the pace of a runaway freight train?That is what the media industry is now facing. Most companies are manoeuvring uneasily, trying to find ways to co-operate with the digital platforms that are coming to dominate their world. But to judge by the discussion at events like the Financial Times’ digital media conference, held in London earlier this week, the challenges of adapting to the new world are only getting harder.

Fuente: Media groups face up to how tech groups now call the shots –

Mejorar la cooperación internacional también debería ser parte del debate sobre el cifrado – Derechos Digitales

Para proteger las comunicaciones seguras y, con ello, la privacidad y la misma integridad de internet, también es necesario plantear una agenda que avance en la cooperación internacional de forma amplia. Un reciente caso en Brasil puede dar pistas de esto.

Fuente: Mejorar la cooperación internacional también debería ser parte del debate sobre el cifrado – Derechos Digitales

Facebook’s effort hits India hurdle –

Facebook’s effort hits India hurdle –

US chairman and chief executive of Facebook Mark Zuckerberg gestures as he announces the Innovation Challenge in India in New Delhi on October 9, 2014. Zuckerberg is attending a two-day summit which will discuss ways to make internet access available to people who cannot afford it globally. AFP PHOTO / CHANDAN KHANNA©AFP

A series of Indian media and technology groups have walked away from, the Facebook-backed initiative to help more people in the developing world get online, in a battle over net neutrality that is set to damage founder Mark Zuckerberg’s pet project.

Cleartrip, a prominent travel ecommerce group, became the latest to pull out, joining news channel NDTV and Newshunt, a media start-up. The Times of India group, which publishes the country’s most-read English-language newspaper, has also pulled some of its services from the coalition. provides free access to some but not all types of online information, raising the ire of those who say all content should be treated equally.The moves intensify a battle in India over net neutrality, a term used by campaigners who want all data online to be treated equally, meaning broadband and mobile companies should not charge different fees depending on the content transmitted on their networks.

The row over Facebook’s project follows a decision earlier this week by Flipkart, India’s leading ecommerce group by revenue, to withdraw from an app provided by Airtel, the top-ranked mobile operator by users, citing similar concerns.

Launched in 2013, is a high-profile push by Mr Zuckerberg to bring the internet to those who lack it, largely in the developing world, via partnerships between Facebook and telecoms companies.

In India, which is also Facebook’s second-largest market by users, linked up with billionaire Anil Ambani’s Reliance Communications.

These partnerships allow particular services or apps to be “zero-rated”, meaning users are not charged for the data required to access them.

Although this aims to make services such as healthcare advice more accessible, its approach has been criticised by net neutrality advocates.

Cleartrip announced its intention to quit via Twitter on Wednesday evening. “Time to draw a line in the sand, Cleartrip is pulling out of & standing up for NetNeutrality,” it said.


Europe is wrong to take a sledgehammer to Big Google –

Europe is wrong to take a sledgehammer to Big Google –

We need nimble enterprises to operate on a level plain with US groups, writes Evgeny Morozov
The Google Inc. logo is displayed on a computer screen for a photograph in San Francisco, California, U.S., on Friday, July 6, 2012. Google Inc., the worlds largest search engine, is scheduled to release earnings data on July 19. Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg©Bloomberg


t is the continent’s favourite hobby, and even the European Parliament cannot resist: having a pop at the world’s biggest search engine. In a recent and largely symbolic vote, representatives urged that Google search should be separated from its other services — demanding, in essence, that the company be broken up.

This would benefit Google’s detractors but not, alas, European citizens. Search, like the social networking sector dominated by Facebook, appears to be a natural monopoly. The more Google knows about each query — who is making it, where and why — the more relevant its results become. A company that has organised, say, 90 per cent of the world’s information would naturally do better than a company holding just one-tenth of that information.

But search is only a part of Google’s sprawling portfolio. Smart thermostats and self-driving cars are information businesses, too. Both draw on Google’s bottomless reservoirs of data, sensors such as those embedded in hardware, and algorithms. All feed off each other.

Policy makers do not yet grasp the dilemma. To unbundle search from other Google services is to detach them from the context that improves their accuracy and relevance. But to let Google operate as a natural monopoly is to allow it to invade other domains.

Facebook presents a similar dilemma. If you want to build a service around your online persona — be it finding new music or sharing power tools with neighbours — its identity gateway comes in handy. Mapping our interests and social connections, Facebook is the custodian of our reputations and consumption profiles. It makes our digital identity available to other businesses and, when we interact with those businesses, Facebook itself learns even more.

Given that data about our behaviour might hold the key to solving problems from health to climate change, who should aggregate them? And should they be treated as a commodity and traded at all?

Imagine if such data could accrue to the citizens who actually generate them, in a way that favoured its communal use. So a community could visualise its precise travel needs and organise flexible and efficient bus services — never travelling too empty or too full — to rival innovative transport start-up Uber. Taxis ordered through Uber (in which Google is an investor) can now play songs passengers have previously “liked” on music-streaming service Spotify (Facebook is an ally), an indication of what becomes possible once our digital identity lies at the heart of service provision. But to leave these data in the hands of the Google-
Facebook clan is to preclude others from finding better uses for it.

We need a data system that is radically decentralised and secure; no one should be able to obtain your data without permission, and no one but you should own it. Stripped of privacy-compromising identifiers, however, they should be pooled into a common resource. Any aspiring innovator or entrepreneur — not just Google and Facebook — should be able to gain ac­cess to that data pool to build their own app. This would bring an abundance of unanticipated features and services.

What Europe needs is not an Airbus to Google’s Boeing but thousands of nimble enterprises that operate on a level playing field with big American companies. This will not happen until we treat certain types of data as part of a common infrastructure, open to all. Imagine the outrage if a large company bought every copy of a particular book, leaving none for the libraries. Why would we accept such a deal with our data?

Basic searches — “Who wrote War and Peace?” — do not require Google’s sophistication and can be provided for free. Unable to hoard user data for advertising purposes, Google could still provide advanced search services, perhaps for a fee (not necessarily charged to citizens). The bill for finding books or articles related to the one you are reading could be picked up by universities, libraries or even your employer.

America will not abandon the current model of centralised, advertising-funded services; its surveillance state needs them. Russia and China have lessened their dependence on Google and Facebook, only to replace them with local equivalents.

Europe should know better. It has a modicum of respect for data protection. Its citizens are uneasy with the rapaciousness of Silicon Valley. But this is no reason to return to the not-so-distant past, when data were expensive and hard to aggregate. European politicians should take a longer term view. The problem with Google is not that it is too big but that it hoovers up data that does not belong to it.

The writer is the author of ‘To Save Everything, Click Here’


El Ciudadano » “Hostil a la privacidad”: Snowden insta a deshacerse de Dropbox, Facebook y Google

El Ciudadano » “Hostil a la privacidad”: Snowden insta a deshacerse de Dropbox, Facebook y Google.

Edward Snowden ha arremetido contra Dropbox y otros servicios por ser “hostiles a la privacidad”, instando a los usuarios a que abandonen la comunicación sin cifrar y configuren la privacidad para evitar el espionaje gubernamental.

Snowden aconseja a los usuarios de internet “deshacerse” de Dropbox, ya que este servicio encripta los datos solo durante la transferencia y el almacenamiento en los servidores. El excontratista de la NSA recomienda en su lugar los servicios, por ejemplo, de SpiderOak, que codifican la información también mientras se encuentra en el ordenador.

“Estamos hablando de abandonar los programas que son hostiles a la privacidad”, señaló Snowden en una entrevista con ‘The New Yorker’.

Lo mismo ocurre, en su opinión, con redes sociales como Facebook y también con Google. Snowden apunta a que son “peligrosos” y propone que la gente use otros servicios que permitan enviar mensajes cifrados como RedPhone o SilentCircle.

How the web lost its way – and its founding principles | Technology | The Guardian

How the web lost its way – and its founding principles | Technology | The Guardian.

When Tim Berners-Lee invented the world wide web 24 years ago he thought he’d created an egalitarian tool that would share information for the greater good. But it hasn’t quite worked out like that. What went wrong?
Tim Berners-Lee portrait with glowing globe

‘There’s this huge corporate pushback’ … Tim Berners-Lee. Photograph: Catrina Genovese/WireImage

In 2009, an American civil rights lawyer created a mashup mapping a neighbourhood called Coal Run, Ohio. It showed which houses were connected to the town’s water supply and which houses were occupied by black or white families. A mashup uses data from more than one source, usually publicly available information, and almost always presents it on a map. The results were extraordinary: the map showed that almost all the white households in Coal Run had water piped to their homes, while all but a few black households did not. Those without piped water had to carry water home from the water plant by whatever transport they could muster, pump it from wells contaminated with sulphur and oil from old mining operations or, in extremis, collect rainwater.

For more than 50 years, Coal Run’s African American residents had called on local authorities to remedy this inequity. Nothing happened except that, during that time, public waterlines spread around Coal Run to new businesses and homes – overwhelmingly to white people’s homes. The mashup helped them get what they wanted when it was used as part of a discrimination complaint to the Ohio civil rights commission. But what had changed? Surely the disgraceful facts were already at the complainants’ disposal? The answer was that the data could be assembled differently online.

“We could articulate the case in words,” said civil rights lawyer Reed Colfax who represented the residents. “But when you’d put up the maps,they’d stop listening to you and look at them [as if to] say, ‘Is this really possible?'”

Since Coal Run was connected to the city’s water supply, a federal jury has awarded its residents $11m in damages from the city of Zanesville and Muskingum County. Now it’s only a few older residents who think that when it rains it’s a good time to do the laundry.

The case is used by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the man who invented the world wide web nearly 24 years ago, as an example of the sharing, perhaps caring and certainly egalitarian principles realised by means of his invention. At a recent Ted talk, Berners-Lee also cited as evidence of the help the web can be to humanity the case of GeoEye, a company that shortly after Haiti’s 2010 earthquake released satellite imagery of the devastated areas, with a licence that allowed people to use it. Quickly, relief workers zoomed into it – and added to OpenStreetMap details about the devastated area – to build up a picture of which roads were blocked, which buildings damaged, where refugee camps were growing and when medical ships were reaching port. “The site rapidly became the map to use on the ground if you were doing relief work,” said Berners-Lee.

This sort of thing was what he hoped would be made possible after the birth of the world wide web at Cern in Geneva in December 1990. “It consisted of one web site and one browser, which happened to be on the same computer,” he recalls. The simple setup demonstrated a profound concept: that any person could share information with anyone else, anywhere. In this spirit, the web spread quickly from the grassroots up.

Autoridades chinas son partidarias de Facebook pero para uso propio – BioBioChile

Autoridades chinas son partidarias de Facebook pero para uso propio – BioBioChile.


Marco Paköeningrat (cc) en FlickrMarco Paköeningrat (cc) en Flickr


Publicado por Gabriela Ulloa | La Información es de Agencia AFP


Las autoridades chinas impiden a sus 618 millones de internautas acceder a las redes sociales internacionales como Facebook, Twitter, y YouTube, pero no dudan en recurrir a ellas cuando se trata de promocionarse en el extranjero.

La agencia de prensa oficial Xinhua, el Diario del Pueblo, órgano oficial del Partido Comunista, y la televisión pública CCTV tienen cuentas de Twitter, como muchas ciudades y gobiernos locales.

Para mejorar su visibilidad internacional, la ciudad de Hangzhou, conocida por su lago y sus canales, es una de ellas.

Su concurso para elegir al “Marco Polo moderno” cuenta con seis módulos en Facebook. El ganador, un suizo de 26 años, se adjudicó 40.000 euros, un viaje de dos semanas en Hangzhou y tendrá que promocionar la ciudad en Facebook y en Twitter durante un año.

“Gran muralla informática”

Las autoridades comunistas someten la expresión a un estricto control, tanto en la red como fuera de ella, y bloquean numerosas webs y redes sociales extranjeras.

Para esquivar esta “gran muralla informática”, los internautas y empresas chinas usan redes privadas virtuales (VPN), y los medios de comunicación oficiales recurren a sus oficinas en el extranjero.

Para su concurso, Hangzhou recurrió a una agencia digital instalada en Hong Kong.

El gigante de las redes sociales explora activamente el país. “Queremos ayudar a las agencias de turismo a hablar de todo lo que se malinterpreta en el extranjero sobre China”, explicó Vaughan Smith, vicepresidente del desarrollo de Facebook, el mes pasado en Pekín.

Facebook está en negociaciones sobre la apertura de una oficina en la capital china. La empresa publicó recientemente en su página una oferta de empleo en Pekín.

Sheryl Sandberg, la directora de explotación de Facebook, se reunió en septiembre con el jefe de departamento de información de Consejo de Asuntos de Estado chino, encargado de la propaganda.

Google también tiene tres oficinas en China continental, pese a una demanda sobre la censura que le obligó a retirar sus servidores del país en 2010.

Por el contrario Twitter, defensor de la libertad de expresión en la red, no muestra especial interés por instalarse en China, aunque su director general, Dick Costolo, se reunió con funcionarios en su primera visita al país en marzo pasado.

Facebook no consigue comprar SnapChat ni por 3.000 millones | Tecnología | EL PAÍS

Facebook no consigue comprar SnapChat ni por 3.000 millones | Tecnología | EL PAÍS.


Los fundadores de SnapChat.

Tres mil millones no son suficientes. El gigante Facebook no ha podido comprar un enanito llamado, Snapchat, una red social juvenil que hace desaparecer fotos y vídeos 10 segundos después de su envío.

El precio que pagaba Facebook por SnapChat, del que ha informado The Wall Street Journal- es muy superior a sus ingresos, a su evaluación financiera incluso a sus usuarios, pero tienen algo que Facebook persigue desesperadamente, como se ha visto por la intentona, juventud. La misma que intentó obtener con la compra de Instagram.

Snapchat, creado por los jóvenes Bobby Murphy (24 años) y Even Spiegel (22 años) hace dos años, tiene 5 millones de usuarios diarios que envían 350 millones de mensajes, según los datos de esta red social. En diciembre, los usuarios eran tres millones y se envían 60 millones de fotos.

Presidente de la Fundación de Software Libre de Europa: a Facebook le quedan 3 años

Karsten Gerloff cree que Facebook desaparecerá en 3 años, como ocurrió con MySpace. Pero no le preocupa, ya que en su opinión es una de las muchas compañías tecnológicas para las que los usuarios no son más que un producto que vender a sus verdaderos clientes: empresas y servicios secretos.


29 de julio de 2013, 13:21

Karsten Gerloff, presidente de la Fundación de Software Libre de Europa (FSFE), participó en Euskal Encounter, donde habló sobre la situación actual y el futuro de la tecnología, el software libre, las redes sociales y la privacidad. La opinión de Karsten Gerloff sobre Facebook es tajante: le quedan 3 años de vida, según las declaraciones que recoge el diario El País. Además, cree que cuando comience su declive, el proceso será rápido, como le ocurrió a MySpace. “Es una ley matemática”, asegura.

De todos modos, esto no será un problema, al menos desde el punto de vista de Gerloff. El alemán cree que la red social no respeta a sus usuarios, pues para ellos no son más que productos, no clientes. Y no sólo hay que preocuparse de las empresas, verdaderos clientes de la compañía, sino también de organizaciones gubernamentales y servicios secretos. Puede sonar exagerado, pero los últimos acontecimientos parecen darle la razón; al menos, en parte.