The Apple Watch Series 3 ripoff: how carriers want to charge for zero data use

The Apple Watch Series 3 can take phone calls. But you’ll pay for that. Photo by portalgda on Flickr.

On first trying the Apple Watch, in 2015, my reaction was that it did a lot of things pretty well. I still wished that it had an always-on screen. But earlier this year I started taking exercise more seriously. At that point, it suddenly comes into its own: the workout apps, the heart monitoring, the calorie estimator. Add AirPods – I was quick enough to snag a pair when they went on sale in the UK last Christmas – and you have a terrific combo for running: store some music on your watch, connect AirPods, go running. No wires, no phones, and no, they don’t fall out.

When I’m out I see other runners with phones strapped to their wrists, with headphone wires all over the place. They give me odd looks. I give them an odd look right back. Exercising without wires is how it’s meant to be. (If you’ve got a Watch then I recommend the HeartWatch app, which gives you the granular detail of your heart rate, especially during workouts.)

Since you can add Apple Pay, the Watch becomes a device that can do everything while you’re out and about, even without a phone. Except.. if you don’t have a phone you can’t take phone calls, or receive and respond to text and other forms of messages, or get new data for Maps, or activate Siri, etc, etc.

Adding mobile (“cellular”) capability makes perfect sense there. Now you really can leave the phone at home, because you can receive calls anywhere you get coverage – with good LTE this means plenty of places, such as the middle of a lake, as in the Apple demo – and make them, because your contacts list is in the phone, and failing that there’s a Big Buttoned Virtual Keypad.

And generally in technology, if someone can, someone will. Samsung had already gone there, but its device was big and bulky, and it didn’t have the same phone number as your phone. Apple has solved that.

Zero data, zero incentive

What doesn’t make sense is the price that carriers are looking to charge for hooking your Watch to their network. In the US, the price is put at $10/month; in the UK, at £5 per month, on EE.

These are outrageous prices, on a par with the ludicrous data charges that carriers used to apply before the iPhone. In those days, up to mid-2007, to want data on the move marked you out as someone with money to burn, or else a raging desire for debt.

Why outrageous? Because Watch cellular data use is not additive; it’s substitutive. If you’re pulling in data on your cellular Watch, you must have left your phone behind. Ergo, you’re doing nothing with the phone, so it’s consuming (next to) no data. The data consumption has shifted to your Watch.

(Just to be clear: Apple says that your Watch uses the best available connection with your phone. If you’re in Bluetooth range, it uses that. If you’re on the same Wi-Fi network (or even, magically, a Wi-Fi network that your phone knows how to connect to, even somewhere distant) then it’ll use Wi-Fi. Now, if you’re not in range of either of those, the Watch will connect to the data network when it has to. But most of the time, and especially when you have your phone with you, it won’t be connecting to the mobile network.)

If anything, you’ll be consuming less data while you’re Watching solo – you won’t be loading Facebook pages, or giant email attachments, or scrolling through Twitter, or watching YouTube. Sure, you might be listening to music streamed from Apple Music. But you might well have been doing that anyway; if you like streaming music while you run, you’ve probably been doing that already, but with a phone around your arm. (And you can get music onto the Watch just by downloading it from the phone, rather like one used to with iPods. This is probably the biggest use case of music on the Watch even if you can stream, because runner like to create their own playlists, not rely on stuff in the cloud.)

Nor do the carriers have to send you a physical SIM; it’s done in software, in the Watch. Nor do they have to open a new account; you’re already a customer. There might be a mild bit of back-end administration to inform the cell network that two different IMEIs (mobile device IDs) have the same phone number. (Side note: the fact this can be done implies that spying on your phone calls may be easier than it seems?)

But there’s nothing in there which justifies $10/month or £5/month. And think of what that adds to the cost of the device: $120 or £60 per year. That’s a substantial chunk of the upfront price, and it never stops. On Twitter, Marine Engelvuori points out that EE ties you to a 24-month contract if you buy the watch from them, and that you have to add VAT; suddenly that device which costs £399 on its own has added £200-odd of costs over the contract lifetime.

If the cost were $1 or £1 per month, that would be tolerable; one can concede that carriers could charge for the tiny bit of administration cost that might be involved, and maybe eke a profit on the fact of this device’s new qualities. But more than that is just absurd, and it will stifle purchases by anyone who might be a marginal buyer of the service.

This is a real pity. The Series 3 is a remarkable piece of engineering: turning the screen into the aerial (I don’t even know how they do this) and maintaining the thin profile is just amazing. All the software functionality, such as heart rate monitoring and so on, is top class. People could benefit from cell-connected smartwatches, and not only the ones made by Apple. (It might encourage people to spend less time staring at screens, weirdly enough.)

But the price that the carriers are trying to charge is stupid.

Third-party like it’s 2006

It really is 2006 in wearable land; the time before carriers woke up to the broader benefit of offering services at prices which encourage people to use them. Wearables are, arguably, still at the same stage in their evolution as the smartphone was in 2006. This doesn’t mean though that the carriers couldn’t act as the midwives to help things along a little.

Remember, they’re trying to charge this amount for something which will use no extra data over you using your phone, and for which they don’t have to provide a physical item.

There is a precedent for doing this well: Amazon and the Kindle. The deal it cut for “Whispernet” meant you could download books anywhere and all you paid for was the extra 3G functionality in the upfront price. No ongoing fees. I can imagine that Apple’s board gulped a bit at the potential cost of doing that for the Watch, when people would no doubt eagerly take the chance to stream music all day and all night long forever for the extra £70. Kindle files are pretty small compared with music files, and Amazon had a monopoly on that market. So it was probably a non-starter for Apple to shoulder the cost. (This doesn’t mean there’s a cost to the carriers – as I said above, it’s substitutive. But it would be all new costs for Apple to pay for Watch data.)

Maybe the first carriers are just hoping to rake it in before competition opens up and drives prices down. Here’s hoping.

It took the iPhone, and Steve Jobs’s negotiating genius, to get carriers to adopt a flat rate model for data. It’s a disappointment that Apple hasn’t managed to push the future of connectivity forward in the other place where it matters – not on your wrist, because they’ve solved that; but in your wallet.

Start Up: Facebook’s fake election rallies, Trump blocks Lattice buy, Equifax’s woeful security, and more

Fonts can tell tales – and reveal liars – if you know enough about them. Photo by stewf on Flickr.

You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

A selection of 10 links for you. Is that really your face, though? I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

Purged Facebook page tied to the Kremlin spread anti-immigrant bile • The New York Times

Scott Shane:


The notice went out on Facebook last year, calling citizens of Twin Falls, Idaho, to an urgent meeting about the “huge upsurge of violence toward American citizens” by Muslim refugees who had settled there.

The inflammatory post, however, originated not in Idaho but in Russia. The meeting’s sponsor, an anti-immigrant page called “Secured Borders,” was one of hundreds of fake Facebook accounts created by a Russian company with Kremlin ties to spread vitriolic messages on divisive issues.

Facebook acknowledged last week that it had closed the accounts after linking them to advertisements costing $100,000 that were purchased in Russia’s influence campaign during and after the 2016 election. But the company declined to release or describe in detail the pages and profiles it had linked to Russia.

A report by the Russian media outlet RBC last March, however, identified the Secured Borders page as the work of the Internet Research Agency, a St. Petersburg firm that employs hundreds of so-called trolls to post material in support of Russian government policies. A Facebook official confirmed that Secured Borders was removed in the purge of Russian fakes…

…It also promoted the Aug. 27, 2016, meeting in Twin Falls, called “Citizens before refugees,” which was first reported by The Daily Beast. The call came amid incendiary claims, linking Muslim refugees in Twin Falls to crime, that circulated on far-right websites last year. In May, Alex Jones, of the conspiracy site, retracted a claim that the Twin Falls yogurt company Chobani, which had made a point of hiring refugees, had been “caught importing migrant rapists.”

Shawn Barigar, the mayor of Twin Falls, said that the City Council Chambers, where the supposed meeting was called on a Saturday, were closed that day and that officials did not recall any gathering. But he said that after two years of “robust debate” over the city’s refugee resettlement program, which dates to the 1980s, it was “kind of surreal” to discover that Russia had joined in.


This reminds me of a Philip K Dick short story called “If There Were No Benny Cemoli” which – because he was a genius ahead of his time – is all about fake news and fake events. Something about this really gives me the shivers.
link to this extract

Trump blocks China-backed Lattice bid • Bloomberg


President Donald Trump blocked a Chinese-backed investor from buying Lattice Semiconductor Corp., casting a cloud over Chinese deals seeking U.S. security clearance and spurring a call for fairness from Beijing.

It was just the fourth time in a quarter century that a U.S. president has ordered a foreign takeover of an American firm stopped on national-security concerns. Trump acted on the recommendation of a multi-agency panel, the White House and the Treasury Department said Wednesday. The spurned buyer, Canyon Bridge Capital Partners LLC, is a private-equity firm backed by a Chinese state-owned asset manager.

The Trump administration has maintained a tough stance against Chinese takeovers of American businesses even as it seeks China’s help to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis. Other deals under review include MoneyGram International Inc.’s proposed sale to Ant Financial, the financial-services company controlled by Chinese billionaire Jack Ma. The government is also examining an agreement by Chinese conglomerate HNA Group Co. to buy a stake in SkyBridge Capital LLC, the fund-management firm founded by Anthony Scaramucci, who was briefly Trump’s White House communications director…

…Lattice makes programmable logic chips, which have a wide variety of uses because their attributes can be changed using software. The chips are used in communications, computing, and in industrial and military applications. The company generates more than 70% of its revenue in Asia, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Trump’s move builds on years of U.S. opposition to China’s efforts to bolster its chip industry by buying American technology. China, the world’s largest chip market, has been on the hunt for acquisitions in the field as it looks to build a domestic supply and rely less on imports, as the $300bn global semiconductor industry undergoes its biggest wave of consolidation.


link to this extract

“Font detectives” use their expertise to solve high stakes cases • WIRED

Glenn Fleishman:


Most forgeries that experts expose aren’t very sophisticated to the discerning type eye. [Thomas] Phinney recounts his involvement in a case he calls The Respected Rabbi: A Long Island rabbi faced controversy among his congregation after his name failed to appear on a list of alumni from the school at which he said he’d obtained ordination. Phinney says he was told, too, that the rabbi “didn’t know his theology as well you might expect from a rabbi.”

After much tsorres, the rabbi presented a board member with a faxed copy of his proof of smicha, or ordination, issued in 1968. It was from an institution that had closed, and its records had been destroyed in a fire. Called in to examine the smicha, Phinney quickly noted that the entire document was in fancy, handwritten calligraphy, except the recipient’s name, which was set in a typeface that had a calligraphed feel.

Though diplomas and similar documents were once written by an expert hand, most have been printed en masse for centuries (Harvard started printing its in 1813) with a blank space left for the recipient’s name. That name is typically then added either via a calligrapher or a letterpress in the same font as the rest of the diploma. But a diploma written by hand with the blank filled in with a calligraphic printed typeface? That was extremely unlikely. Phinney also identified the face as Monotype Corsiva, a font released in the early 1990s, making the chronology impossible.


This article has three headlines: the one above, the one on this article (“Meet the font detectives who ferret out fakery”), and the print one – “I shot the serif.” BOOM. Lots of good stories in this.
link to this extract

What happens if a cop forces you to unlock your iPhone X with your face? • The Washington Post

Brian Fung:


While you can’t legally be compelled to give up your passcode, some analysts say, courts have ruled that law enforcement can compel you to give up your fingerprint under certain conditions. Under a standard known as “reasonable suspicion,” you can be required to provide your fingerprint. Could the same standard be applied to your facial data? That’s what is unclear.

That said, Americans enjoy one additional layer of legal protection. Even if a police officer uses your biometric information to unlock a phone, he or she must still obtain a search warrant to search the phone. The warrantless searching of cellphones was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Riley v. California in 2014.

“That’s now established Supreme Court doctrine,” Calabrese said. Either way, he said, the best protection is probably to use a strong passcode.

Given how confusing the law can be on these issues, can’t there be some kind of technological solution?

A partial one may be in the works. The new version of Apple’s mobile operating system, iOS 11, is said to contain a fail-safe that will not only disable Touch ID, but also potentially Face ID. By pressing the power button five times in quick succession, an iPhone will stop accepting biometric data as an unlocking mechanism and require a passcode, according to the researcher who discovered the feature in a beta version of iOS 11.

It is not clear how long the fail-safe lasts before things revert to the regular mode. Apple did not respond to a request for comment.


It was all going so well until that last paragraph, which is clueless. “Regular mode” is “requiring a passcode”. Only when you’ve entered a passcode is the biometric unlock (finger or face) enabled. Pressing the side button five times does indeed disable the biometric unlock. If you feel you need to, that’s your solution.

(Added to the “close but no cigar” category on iPhone X and FaceID.)
link to this extract

Ayuda! (Help!) Equifax has my data! • Krebs on Security

Brian Krebs:


Earlier today, this author was contacted by Alex Holden, founder of Milwaukee, Wisc.-based Hold Security LLC. Holden’s team of nearly 30 employees includes two native Argentinians who spent some time examining Equifax’s South American operations online after the company disclosed the breach involving its business units in North America.

It took almost no time for them to discover that an online portal designed to let Equifax employees in Argentina manage credit report disputes from consumers in that country was wide open, protected by perhaps the most easy-to-guess password combination ever: “admin/admin.”

We’ll speak about this Equifax Argentina employee portal — known as Veraz or “truthful” in Spanish — in the past tense because the credit bureau took the whole thing offline shortly after being contacted by KrebsOnSecurity this afternoon. The specific Veraz application being described in this post was dubbed Ayuda or “help” in Spanish on internal documentation.

Once inside the portal, the researchers found they could view the names of more than 100 Equifax employees in Argentina, as well as their employee ID and email address. The “list of users” page also featured a clickable button that anyone authenticated with the “admin/admin” username and password could use to add, modify or delete user accounts on the system…

Each employee record included a company username in plain text, and a corresponding password that was obfuscated by a series of dots.

However, all one needed to do in order to view said password was to right-click on the employee’s profile page and select “view source,” a function that displays the raw HTML code which makes up the Web site. Buried in that HTML code was the employee’s password in plain text.


link to this extract

Failure to patch two-month-old bug led to massive Equifax breach • Ars Technica

Dan Goodin:


The Equifax breach that exposed sensitive data for as many as 143 million US consumers was accomplished by exploiting a Web application vulnerability that had been patched more than two months earlier, officials with the credit reporting service said Thursday.

“Equifax has been intensely investigating the scope of the intrusion with the assistance of a leading, independent cybersecurity firm to determine what information was accessed and who has been impacted,” company officials wrote in an update posted online. “We know that criminals exploited a US website application vulnerability. The vulnerability was Apache Struts CVE-2017-5638. We continue to work with law enforcement as part of our criminal investigation, and have shared indicators of compromise with law enforcement.”

The flaw in the Apache Struts framework was fixed on March 6. Three days later, the bug was already under mass attack by hackers who were exploiting the flaw to install rogue applications on Web servers. Five days after that, the exploits showed few signs of letting up. Equifax has said the breach on its site occurred in mid-May, more than two months after the flaw came to light and a patch was available.


At what point does not updating become dereliction of duty?
link to this extract

Photos: What it was like to attend Apple’s iPhone X event • Recode

Dan Frommer:


it was the first keynote Apple held in its new Steve Jobs Theater — named after the late Apple founder, who made these “Stevenotes” into the sort of mainstream cultural and media events that millions of people would stream live.

I was in attendance yesterday and took hundreds of photos. Here’s my experience, as told through a few dozen.


They’re great pictures (well, spoiled by some clown in one of them). The one that really captures it is the young kid, who we thought might be the tech correspondent for the Ellen de Generes show – seriously. One day, all tech correspondents will be this young, or old.

What that picture really shows, though, is the amazing size of Apple’s new building, in the distance. It’s perhaps 500m away. It’s circular. And it just seems to go on and on; you can see one edge, but not the other. You know the spaceship in Independence Day, which just looms over everything? Like that, but landed.
link to this extract

Google’s influence over its network of influencers • Search Neutrality

Shivaun and Adam Raff run Foundem, the “vertical search” (shopping) site which first complained to the EC about Google’s demotion of their site in organic results:


We accept that many of the academics and other professionals within Google’s extensive network of influencers sincerely believe that their pro-Google opinions are their own and are not influenced by their (or their institution’s) financial ties to Google.  However, it is noteworthy how often these opinions are underpinned by an eerily consistent misrepresentation of the basic facts of the Google case that belies, at the very least, a failure to treat Google’s representations of the case with the healthy scepticism one would normally reserve for a defendant.

The criticisms of the EC’s Google Search verdict by Google-funded academics and think tanks have tended to rely on and mirror many of the same fundamental misrepresentations and omissions that Google’s own criticisms of the verdict rely on. For example:

• They tend to focus exclusively on Google’s anti-competitive promotion of its own services (through Universal Search), while ignoring Google’s anti-competitive demotions and exclusions of competing services (through anti-competitive penalties). This is an important omission because any defence of one practice inevitably undermines the defence of the other.

• They neglect to point out that pay-for-placement advertisements are not a substitute for the relevance-based search results they are anti-competitively replacing. This is not a minor omission: paid advertisements are not what users visit Google for, and, when they are used to promote the merchants willing to pay Google the most money for a click rather than those offering users the lowest prices, the resultant user harm is obvious.

• They ignore the inconvenient yet immutable fact that Google only introduced these pay-for-placement advertisements (which underpin all of Google’s misleading ad-based arguments) in February 2013—at least 7 years after the introduction of Google’s anti-competitive practices, 3 years after the start of the EC’s investigation, and 11 months after the commencement of “settlement” negotiations with Commissioner Almunia. (See our December 2016 Paper for some of the history, context, and consumer harm resulting from Google’s progressive blurring of the lines between search results and pay-for-placement ads).

The perception-shaping power of Google’s sophisticated and disciplined PR machine is far-reaching.


link to this extract

Apple Watch Edition 3 vs Samsung Gear S3 Frontier LTE • SmartWatch Specifications

The contrast is remarkable: the Apple Watch screen is notably bigger (1.65in v 1.3in), and yet smaller in every other dimension; even compared to the 42mm Watch, not the 38mm, the Samsung has 64% more volume and weighs 33% more.

Some of the finer details on the comparison are wrong though – it doesn’t seem to accept you can take and make calls on the Apple Watch, and it suggests it works with Android devices. It doesn’t.

And of course the Apple Watch will have the same phone number as its parent iPhone; the Samsung device won’t. But don’t get me started on the utter ripoff of the prices carriers are charging for data plans for the Watch, which is substitutional use rather than additive. They should be ashamed. (Via Ben Thompson.)
link to this extract

Do autonomous cars dream of driverless roads? • Dark Reading

Laurence Pitt is strategic director for security at Juniper Networks in Europe/Mid-East/Africa:


The UK government is seeking to take a leadership role in the development of these rules by contributing an Autonomous and Electric Vehicle bill which will create a new insurance framework for self-driving cars. In tandem, the UK Department for Transport and Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure have released a series of documents outlining principles of cyber security for connected and automated vehicles.’These documents form a modern version of Asimov’s Robotic Laws, but with the focus being on the automotive manufacturers to ensure that these vehicles are developed with a defense-in-depth approach so that they remain resilient to threat at all times – even in situations where sensors are unable to respond due to attack or failure.

This legislation will put the United Kingdom at the centre of these new and exciting technological developments, while ensuring that safety and consumer protection remain at the heart of an emerging industry.


Top marks to the sub-editor who ignored Pitt’s chosen narrative (Asimov’s Laws, which as he points out aren’t applicable because the cars aren’t sentient) and went with the Philip K Dick one for the headline.

In fact, I’d say it’s headline of the month.
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: the review of the Essential phone in yesterday’s roundup was by Ryan Whitwam, not David Ruddock.

Start Up: averaging MPs’ faces, Apple’s big OLED plans, what hunter-gatherers had, and more

The iPhone X: still many questions, whose answers you’ll have to wait for. Photo by perzonseo on Flickr.

A selection of 11 links for you. See? I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

The case against civilisation • The New Yorker

John Lanchester reviews “Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States” by James Scott:


So why did our ancestors switch from this complex web of food supplies [as hunter-gatherers] to the concentrated production of single crops? We don’t know, although Scott speculates that climatic stress may have been involved. Two things, however, are clear. The first is that, for thousands of years, the agricultural revolution was, for most of the people living through it, a disaster. The fossil record shows that life for agriculturalists was harder than it had been for hunter-gatherers. Their bones show evidence of dietary stress: they were shorter, they were sicker, their mortality rates were higher. Living in close proximity to domesticated animals led to diseases that crossed the species barrier, wreaking havoc in the densely settled communities. Scott calls them not towns but “late-Neolithic multispecies resettlement camps.” Who would choose to live in one of those? Jared Diamond called the Neolithic Revolution “the worst mistake in human history.” The startling thing about this claim is that, among historians of the era, it isn’t very controversial.

The other conclusion we can draw from the evidence, Scott says, is that there is a crucial, direct link between the cultivation of cereal crops and the birth of the first states. It’s not that cereal grains were humankind’s only staples; it’s just that they were the only ones that encouraged the formation of states. “History records no cassava states, no sago, yam, taro, plantain, breadfruit or sweet potato states,” he writes. What was so special about grains? The answer will make sense to anyone who has ever filled out a Form 1040: grain, unlike other crops, is easy to tax. Some crops (potatoes, sweet potatoes, cassava) are buried and so can be hidden from the tax collector, and, even if discovered, they must be dug up individually and laboriously. Other crops (notably, legumes) ripen at different intervals, or yield harvests throughout a growing season rather than along a fixed trajectory of unripe to ripe—in other words, the taxman can’t come once and get his proper due. Only grains are, in Scott’s words, “visible, divisible, assessable, storable, transportable, and ‘rationable.’ ” Other crops have some of these advantages, but only cereal grains have them all, and so grain became “the main food starch, the unit of taxation in kind, and the basis for a hegemonic agrarian calendar.” The taxman can come, assess the fields, set a level of tax, then come back and make sure he’s got his share of the harvest.


Also in the piece: we don’t give our forebears enough credit for their innovations. Principally, the adoption and use of fire.
link to this extract

Essential Phone review: Essentially okay • Android Police

David Ruddock:


The biggest potential deal breaker is the camera, which is considerably below average. Shutter lag is huge, and focusing takes too long. Photos often have washed out colors, poorly managed exposure, and HDR mode makes almost no difference in image quality (but it does slow the camera down even more). There are phones with better cameras that cost much less (like the OnePlus 5). The Pixel or Galaxy S8 absolutely blow the Essential Phone out of the water when it comes to photo quality. Those phones only have one camera, too. The Essential Phone’s secondary monochrome sensor is supposed to sharpen photos, but I can’t say if it’s doing any good. What I can say is Essential needs to work on its image processing algorithms.

Essential is doing some fascinating stuff with the hardware, and I definitely want to see more from the company. However, I don’t think spending $700 on this device is a good idea.


link to this extract

IPad Pro: Apple quietly hikes the price • CNBC

Todd Haselton:


Apple quietly increased the price of the 256GB and 512GB versions of its 10.5-inch and 12.9-inch iPad Pro tablets.

The price change was first spotted by the blog MacRumors.

Prior to Tuesday’s Apple rollout, consumers could purchase the 256GB and 512GB 10.9-inch iPad Pro for $749 and $949, respectively. Those models now cost $799 and $999, respectively. The 12.9-inch iPad Pro saw its 256GB and 512GB models increase by $50 to $949 and $1,149, respectively, with the latter nearing the price of a MacBook.

The price of the 64GB version of both iPads remains unchanged.


It raised the prices on last year’s iPhones too. So this is surely about memory – prices have rocketed in the past year or so.
link to this extract

The one wireless speaker you won’t ever want to hide from view • Bloomberg


Master & Dynamic, the three-year-old New York startup, has quickly made an impression among aficionados for its headphones and earbuds. It also has a way with collaborations, including standouts with the Rolling Stones, Bamford Watch Department, and Leica Camera. Now, for its first venture into the world of speakers, Master & Dynamic has enlisted Sir David Adjaye, whose National Museum of African American History and Culture opened in Washington last year. The architect upends the category with the MA770, a striking 35-pound, 16-by-20-inch countertop unit made of concrete composite.


Look at the picture and you will agree with me that not only will you want to hide it from view, you will not want to spend money on it nor bring it home.
link to this extract

Sony and Samsung pressure Huawei’s growth in Europe • Kantar Worldpanel

Dominic Sunnebo on the three months to the end of July 2017, according to Kantar’s longitudinal buyer panel (which looks at shifts in ownership, not pure sales numbers):


The renewed focus by Sony and Samsung on their successful entry-level models put more pressure on Huawei in Europe, as its share fell in Spain and Great Britain. However, gains in Germany and Italy helped Huawei’s EU5 share grow to 14.6% in the three months ending July, up from 12.4% one year earlier.

In the USA, Samsung remained in the top spot during the three months ending in July with a 36.2% share, with Apple close behind at 34.1%. The growth rates of the two brands are almost exactly matched at 2.5% for Samsung and 2.6% for Apple. The iPhone 7 was the top-selling handset during the period at 12.6% of sales, while the newer Samsung Galaxy S8 stood at 8.8%.

“Apple’s US growth is very impressive, given that an all-new iPhone is expected to be announced on September 12, and should become available for purchase later in the month,” Sunnebo added.

Apple saw something of a rebound in Urban China in the July data period, with share +5.1%pts to 19.3%. The large screen iPhone 7 Plus was the top selling device in Urban China in the month of July, the first time the Plus version has outsold the smaller screen iPhone 7.


link to this extract

South Korean companies start to make investments again for Apple’s OLED iPhones • ET News Korea

Yun Keonil:


South Korean companies started making second investments in order to supply their products to Apple for its OLED iPhones.. Because Apple is planning to double the amount of models that will be equipped with OLED displays in 2018 after releasing its first OLED iPhones this year, many Smartphone part manufacturers started extending their production facilities. It is heard that Apple is planning to produce up to 170 million OLED iPhones in 2018 after producing about 70 million OLED iPhones this year. If current Smartphone part manufactures obtain entire orders of increased supply, Apple’s sales will jump by about 140%. It is predicted that its sales will jump up to 100% even if reduction in unit cost due to increase in supply is considered. Billions of dollars worth of trickle down effect is expected as Apple is set to release more OLED iPhones.


70m iPhone Xs in 2017 is a lot of iPhone Xs.
link to this extract

Apple’s iPhone X: wait for the reviews • The Verge

Vlad Savov raises (but sensibly doesn’t try to answer) many valid questions, such as “how good is the new swipe-based interface?” and “will the glass back hold up over the long run?”:


Many of today’s questions about the iPhone X are inherent in Apple’s premise of this being the phone of the future. Of course the day-one iPhone X apps will be mere adaptations of iPhone apps that were built for different screens, devices, and interaction paradigms. You can’t expect those to be superior right away, but the idea is that the new UI and taller, bezel-starved screen will eventually pay off in a better overall user experience. The same goes for Face ID and the hardware tweaks designed to facilitate useful things like wireless charging.

If you ask Apple, the company will probably tell you that the iPhone X is its no-compromise vision for what a phone should be. I look at things a little differently. The sensor-laden notch at the top of the iPhone X’s screen is an apt metaphor for the compromises Apple had to make: it spoils the perfect all-screen front just a little bit, representing the eternal struggle to balance aesthetic and technical requirements in a thoughtful way. How well the iPhone X strikes that balance is an open question right now. And that’s what makes me wary to reach conclusions until at least the first reviews come in.


This is absolutely the right approach. And even initial reviews won’t answer this, because they’ll be about having used the phone for a week or so. This is going to be a long haul. (Thanks RG for the link.)
link to this extract

Smartphones are driving all growth in web traffic • Recode


Smartphones are driving all growth in U.S. web traffic, while tablets and computer web access has declined, according to new data from Adobe Analytics.

Screenshot 2017 09 13 06 47 29

Since January 2015, there has been a 68% increase in smartphone web traffic in the U.S., while desktop and tablet both saw declines. Overall, web traffic has been pretty much flat, according to Adobe’s Media & Metrics report that was released Monday. Adobe tracked more than 150 billion visits to or launches of 400 large company sites and apps since January 2015, using anonymous and aggregated data from companies on Adobe Experience Cloud.


This is change rather than total, but it’s still dramatic. -30% for desktops/laptops, -16% for tablets.
link to this extract

I calculated the average face of a UK Member of Parliament and here’s what I found • Medium

Giuseppe Sollazzo:


The UK Parliament Digital Service has recently released an archive of official portraits of MPs shot by photographer Chris McAndrew (under a CC BY licence! Open Data, yay!) As I’m playing with image manipulation and Machine Learning to train a cohort of medical researchers, I thought the portraits would make an excellent test of what’s possible in the wild.

Using Machine Learning on faces has recently been subject of controversy, when researchers at Stanford University developed an algorithm that detects whether the face in a photo belongs to a gay person. Steering away from controversy, I thought that it would be interesting to find out what the average MP looks like. There has been a good deal of research on this concept, some of which is rather catchy. In 2015 the Guardian reported that we tend to find average faces the most attractive. I’m not sure this applies to MPs (and let’s avoid all jokes about average, i.e. centrist, faces), but here we go.


Here you go:

As he observes: quite like Cameron. But he then breaks it down into political parties, which gives some nuance.
link to this extract

How my doppelgänger used the Internet to find and befriend me • Splnter News

Kashmir Hill:


My first reaction was, “Whoa. This is creepy.” When I showed it to colleagues and friends, they had the same reaction. Not only did she look a lot like me, but she had obviously gone to some trouble to stage a photo in the same pose as my Google Plus profile photo.

She explained in the email that she and her two young sons had been eating at a “Smashburger” in her hometown of Phoenix when three “well-dressed gentlemen” approached her and one said, “I hope this doesn’t sound too weird but does your name happen to be Kashmir?” When she said no, he showed her a photo of me that he’d pulled up on his smartphone; she was shocked by the likeness. They told her I was a big name in what sounded like “bit con” to her. When she got home, she tried to find me by Googling variations of “Cashmere” and “bit con” with no success. Then she asked Facebook for help. A friend of hers who knew people interested in Bitcoin quickly figured out who I was and posted a photo of me that Leigh was convinced was her, until she realized she had never owned the shirt I was wearing. “Mind blown,” one of her Facebook friends commented. “It’s like the twins separated at birth from a soap opera,” said another.

After deciding that this person probably wasn’t planning to murder me and take over my life, I emailed back about the uncanny likeness, and asked if she wanted to meet or videochat to see if we looked as much alike when our faces were moving. So we arranged a FaceTime meeting to compare faces. We both felt like looking alike meant we had to meet for some reason.


This is from 2015. Now, of course, we want Kashmir and her kinda-double to try out Apple’s iPhone X face recognition to see if it can tell the difference. (My guess: it will.)
link to this extract

Google responds to Apple’s Intelligent Tracking Prevention with AdWords tracking update • Search Engine Land

Ginny Marvin:


In short, with ITP, third-party cookies that are determined to be able to track users across sites can only be used for 24 hours from the time a user visits a website via Safari. After 24 hours, the third-party cookies can only be used for log-in purposes. The cookies are purged entirely after 30 days.

This means that unless a user converts within 24 hours of last visiting an advertiser’s site after clicking an AdWords ad, for example, the conversion attribution will be lost. With Safari accounting for nearly 50% of mobile web traffic share in North America, ITP has the potential to wreak havoc on mobile ad conversion attribution.


This sounds arcane (ok, it is quite arcane) but for Google, it has the ability to (as the article says) wreak havoc on the satisfaction of advertisers. (Not people on the web.) In essence, Google and Apple are still fighting a guerilla battle over pervasive tracking.
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

Start Up: Apple Pay on iPhone X, Russia’s fake Americans, Yelp accuses Google, and more

Apple’s new iPhone has a big screen. Not quite that big. Photo by Mark Gregory007 on Flickr.

A selection of 10 links for you. Priced to sell. I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

The fake Americans Russia created to influence the election • The New York Times

Scott Shane:


Sometimes an international offensive begins with a few shots that draw little notice. So it was last year when Melvin Redick of Harrisburg, Pa., a friendly-looking American with a backward baseball cap and a young daughter, posted on Facebook a link to a brand-new website.

“These guys show hidden truth about Hillary Clinton, George Soros and other leaders of the US,” he wrote on June 8, 2016. “Visit #DCLeaks website. It’s really interesting!”

Mr. Redick turned out to be a remarkably elusive character. No Melvin Redick appears in Pennsylvania records, and his photos seem to be borrowed from an unsuspecting Brazilian. But this fictional concoction has earned a small spot in history: The Redick posts that morning were among the first public signs of an unprecedented foreign intervention in American democracy.

A Facebook post, by someone claiming to be Melvin Redick, promoting a website linked to the Russian military intelligence agency G.R.U. Credit The New York Times

The DCLeaks site had gone live a few days earlier, posting the first samples of material, stolen from prominent Americans by Russian hackers, that would reverberate through the presidential election campaign and into the Trump presidency. The site’s phony promoters were in the vanguard of a cyberarmy of counterfeit Facebook and Twitter accounts, a legion of Russian-controlled impostors whose operations are still being unraveled.


This is quite an investigation, done by the NYT with FireEye.
link to this extract

Screw my iPhone, I just want the new Apple Watch • Fast Co Design

Jesus Diaz:


This is a tiny device that I can wrap around my wrist to connect me to other people beaming signals through space without having to look like too much of a douchebag. I can take it with me at all times without worrying about it getting dropped or stolen. I use it to do everything I do with my iPhone except take photos and videos. I can access all the music I have in the cloud and listen to it in my AirPods. And it has new, enhanced heart monitoring software–the icing on the cake that will alert me when I have a heart attack on my way from the sofa to the fridge to lick the actual icing on the actual cake that is waiting for me right now.

Can I ditch my iPhone and live with an Apple Watch Series 3? Yes, if it truly works as advertised, I think I can. Like me, I suspect millions will look at this watch as an alternative to their phones–if not as a complete replacement, at least as a replacement for a large part of their day. The phone is still better for things that require concentration, like extensive writing, reading, or viewing large photos and videos. But I only do those things for work, and only on very specific occasions.


Alas, US carriers are pricing the data plan for the new Watch at $10/month – which is a ripoff. Consider: when you’re using the Watch, you’re pretty much certainly not using your phone, so you’re not using data on it. And you’d have to be going some to use any appreciable amount of data on the Watch. US carriers are greedy. (Three-month free trials don’t solve anything. Drug dealers do the same.)

One can hope for better in the UK and elsewhere. The first partner will be EE; don’t expect that to be cheap either. Competition is needed from those who realise the marginal benefit of really cheap data plans.

Diaz’s broader point, about the shift to smaller screens, is worth considering.
link to this extract

Face ID on the iPhone X is probably going to suck • Ars Technica

Ron Amadeo:


Face ID on the iPhone X uses a “TrueDepth” camera setup, which blasts your face with more than 30,000 infrared dots and scans your face in 3D. Apple says this can “recognize you in an instant” and log you into your phone.

None of that matters. Face ID is still going to suck.

This is not the first phone we’ve tried with a facial recognition feature, and they all have the same problem. It doesn’t matter how fast or accurate Face ID is, the problem is the ergonomics: you need to aim it at your face. This is slow and awkward, especially when compared to a fingerprint reader, which doesn’t have to be aimed at anything.

Consider the “taking it out of your pocket” use case: If you’re good, you’ll stick your hand in your pocket and grip the phone so your finger lands on the fingerprint reader. Touch ID works as both an “on” button and an “authentication” button. In one touch, you’ve turned on the phone and logged in. You haven’t even fully taken the phone out of your pocket yet, and it’s already on and unlocked. By the time you bring the phone to your face, the unlock process is finished and you’re looking at the home screen.

To use the iPhone X’s Face ID, you have take the phone out of your pocket, lift it up to your face, swipe up to turn it on, and only then can can you start the unlock process. The difference is probably one or two seconds, but for something you do 80 times a day, having the fastest possible unlock system really matters.

Consider authenticating with Apple Pay. With a fingerprint reader, you can slam your iPhone on the credit card terminal while holding your finger on the Touch ID button, and everything will just work. You’re continuously authenticating and beaming credit card data at the same time, which is easy, intuitive, and hard to mess up. According to Craig Federighi’s Face ID demo during the keynote, you now have to open up Apple Pay first, then aim the phone at your face so Face ID can work. Only then can you tap against the credit card terminal. That’s two extra steps.


I’m pretty sure Ron wasn’t at the Apple event, so didn’t get hands-on time with the iPhone X. I was, and did. Apple Pay with facial recognition is a key question I’ve raised myself in the past, so asked for a demo.

The unlocking works at easy arm’s length; it’s not like Samsung’s formal version. It’s quick – probably as fast as the first-generation TouchID. For Apple Pay, you could double-click the side button while it’s in your pocket, pull it out, face unlock as you walk (towards a TfL terminal, say) and hold it to the reader. The pay system remains active for 60 seconds. Plus – an advantage – you don’t have to “end-hold” it, where it’s liable to fall or be knocked out of your hand; you’ll be holding it in your full hand grip.

Anyway, it should be fun to come back to this article in eight months’ time or so.
link to this extract

Apple’s iOS 11 makes it tougher than ever for cops to grab your data • WIRED UK

Andy Greenberg:


In recent versions of iOS, any iPhone plugged into an unfamiliar computer would ask the user if he or she was willing to trust that new machine before exchanging any data with it. That meant if cops or border agents were able to seize an unlocked iPhone or compel its owner to unlock a locked one with a finger on its TouchID sensor, they could simply plug it into a desktop via a cable in its lightning port, choose to trust the new machine with a tap, and upload its contents using forensic software like Elcomsoft or Cellebrite. (That’s particularly important because courts have found criminal suspects can’t plead the Fifth Amendment and refuse to offer their fingerprints, as they sometimes can with a password or passcode.)

But in iOS 11, iPhones will not only require a tap to trust a new computer, but the phone’s passcode, too. That means even if forensic analysts do seize a phone while it’s unlocked or use its owner’s finger to unlock it, they still need a passcode to offload its data to a program where it can be analysed wholesale. They can still flip through the data on the phone itself. But if the owner refuses to divulge the passcode, they can’t use forensic tools to access its data in the far more digestible format for analysis known as SQLite. “There’s a huge amount of data that can’t be effectively analysed if you have to look at it manually,” says Vladimir Katalov, Elcomsoft’s co-founder. “On my phone, I have more than 100,000 messages and several thousand call logs. The manual review of that data is not possible.”


In retrospect, an obvious move. This makes the iPhone even more secure against law enforcement – of all stripes.
link to this extract

The best utility apps for iOS • Initial Charge

Michael Rockwell:


On a recent episode of Mac Power Users, Katie Floyd and David Sparks discussed their favorite iOS utilities — simple little apps that do one thing really well. I thought I’d follow in their footsteps and publish a list of, what I consider to be, the best iOS utilities available.


If you use iOS, you’ll probably find something you like here. (Read it on your iPhone/iPad so the links work directly..) The “Unobstruct” content blocker for getting rid of floating social toolbars “and other unnecessary cruft” is probably a must-have.
link to this extract

Yelp claims Google broke promise to antitrust regulators • WIRED

Nitasha Tiku:


As part of the 2012 agreement, operators of other websites can opt out of having content such as photos or user-generated reviews scraped by Google for its own services, such as Shopping or Google+ Local. Yelp opted out and says that Google agreed to stop scraping Yelp content even before the formal agreement [with the FTC in 2012], in response to a cease-and-desist request to Google in July 2011.

Yelp suspected Google had resumed scraping after the owner of a North Carolina gym told Yelp that an image from a Yelp listing for another gym was showing up as its Google business listing. Yelp set up a test to see if Google was pulling images from its servers. Yelp says it found Google pulled almost 386,000 images from Yelp in an hour, and then used some of the photos in business listings in Google Maps. Yelp says it searched Google for 150 of those businesses and found that a Yelp photo was a lead image in Google’s Local OneBox—which shows a business’s location, phone number, and reviews—in 111 cases.


Google is the scorpion on the fox’s back crossing the river: its behaviour is fixed, even if it’s self-destructive. And the key part of that behaviour is scouring the internet for content. The company said “it did not intend” to use the images. Yelp says that 386,000 isn’t quite an accident.
link to this extract

There’s blood in the water in Silicon Valley • Buzzfeed

Ben Smith is Buzzfeed’s editor-in-chief:


The blinding rise of Donald Trump over the past year has masked another major trend in American politics: the palpable, and perhaps permanent, turn against the tech industry. The new corporate leviathans that used to be seen as bright new avatars of American innovation are increasingly portrayed as sinister new centers of unaccountable power, a transformation likely to have major consequences for the industry and for American politics.

That turn has accelerated in recent days: Steve Bannon and Bernie Sanders both want big tech treated as, in Bannon’s words in Hong Kong this week, “public utilities.” Tucker Carlson and Franklin Foer have found common ground. Even the group No Labels, an exquisitely poll-tested effort to create a safe new center, is on board. Rupert Murdoch, never shy to use his media power to advance his commercial interests, is hard at work.

“Anti-trust is back, baby,” Yelp’s policy chief, Luther Lowe, DM’d me after Fox News gave him several minutes to make the antitrust case against Yelp’s giant rival Google to its audience of millions.

The new spotlight on these companies doesn’t come out of nowhere. They sit, substantively, at the heart of the biggest and most pressing issues facing the United States, and often stand on the less popular side of those: automation and inequality, trust in public life, privacy and security. They make the case that growth and transformation are public goods — but the public may not agree.


The noise about making companies like Google and Facebook into “utilities” simply hasn’t been thought through. How do you enforce that, under what laws? How do you effect it in one country but not others? Would the US government own it? It’s bizarre. But the “New Center”, an idea from Americans who in Europe would be seen as solidly right-wing, proposes some sort of reform of antitrust to “deal” with the dominance particularly of Facebook and Google, but also Amazon. (They’re evidently a bit puzzled by Apple’s lack of obvious dominance in anything.)
link to this extract

Trump Inc: inside the president’s not-so-blind trust •

Michael Tanglis:


Our current president has two jobs: leader of the free world and the owner of hundreds of business entities worldwide. The combination is toxic for democracy.

More than 70% of Trump’s businesses are incorporated in Delaware — a state known for anonymity and secrecy. There is often very little information on the Delaware business filings. And the ambiguity and imprecision of the federal financial disclosure form filed with the Office of Government Ethics makes it difficult to discern the detailed financial health of the president or his businesses.

For example, Trump is not required to disclose net income from his businesses (as opposed to gross revenue). This raises the prospect that Trump’s businesses may be hemorrhaging money in years that he reported hundreds of millions of dollars of income. Further, the disclosure guidelines allow Trump to report liabilities totaling just hundreds of millions when the real number may be in the billions.

Trump’s tax returns — which he has refused to release — would provide the detail needed to determine the extent of his conflicts of interest.

Throughout his business career, Trump has been a boom-and-bust businessman — filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection 11 times. If his business approaches another bust moment while he is president, it is hard to imagine Trump — who has exhibited so little restraint both as a businessman and now as president — not succumbing to the temptation to use the powers of his office to benefit his private interests.

In many ways, the Trump presidency is the natural culmination of the decades-long stranglehold of wealthy individuals and corporations over public policy. But Trump has taken the standard model a step further: He has cut out the middleman — the lowly elected official — who by Trump’s own admission typically needed to be greased to make the whole process work. As president, Trump now has immense power to dictate policy and direct funds to his businesses, or to others who in turn can repay him through his businesses.


Delaware’s position as a way to hide business dealings is very peculiar. Trump’s dealings, though, really call into question how robust the US is.
link to this extract

Cognitive Hollywood, part 1: data shows box office economics in turmoil • Medium

Yves Bergquist on the suggestion that low Rotten Tomatoes scores lead to low box office takings in the cinema:


I collected box office return data through Box Office Mojo for all the 150 titles released in 2017 that grossed more than $1 million, plugged in Rotten Tomatoes Scores and Audience Scores for all titles, and looked at correlation between scores and financial performance through both a basic Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient (PMCC) analysis and some linear modeling to extract r-squares (which measure the strength of the correlation). PMCC measures the linear correlation between two variables x and y. It has a value between + 1 (100% positive correlation) and -1 (100% negative correlation, often called “inverse correlation”). The closer to 0 a PMCC score, the less correlation there is between x and y.

The result? Nope. The math is pretty overwhelming in saying there was no (positive or negative) correlation in 2017 between Rotten Tomatoes Scores and box office returns.

The data showed a very small statistical relationship between good or bad Rotten Tomatoes Scores and worldwide box office revenue for 2017 so far: 12% PMCC correlation, and a .009 r-square (meaning there is likely no statistical relationship between the two variables).

Even more surprising, the impact of Rotten Tomatoes scores on opening weekend box office seemed even lower: .08 PMCC score (only 8% correlation), and a -0.001 r-square.

That’s for all 2017 titles so far. What about the Summer titles, which the executives quoted by The New York Times complained about?



So it’s not only “nobody knows anything” but also “and they’re wrong about it”. I’ve heard that social media on the first weekend is now a more important indicator of how box office will go.
link to this extract

Study finds Reddit’s controversial ban of its most toxic subreddits actually worked • TechCrunch

Devin Coldewey:


It’s an example of one of the objections made to the idea of banning troublesome users or communities: they’ll just go elsewhere, so why bother?

Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology took this question seriously, as until someone actually investigates whether such bans are helpful, harmful or some mix thereof, it’s all speculation. So they took a major corpus of Reddit data (compiled by and examined exactly what happened to the hate speech and purveyors thereof, with the two aforementioned subreddits as case studies.

Essentially they looked at the thousands of users that made up CT and FPH (as they call them) and quantified their hate speech usage. They then compared this pre-ban data to the same users post-ban: how much hate speech they produced, where they “migrated” to (i.e. duplicate subreddits, related ones, etc.) and whether “invaded” subreddits experienced spikes in hate speech as a result. Control groups were created by observing the activity of similar subreddits that weren’t banned.

What they found was encouraging for this strategy of reducing unwanted activity on a site like Reddit:

• Post-ban, hate speech by the same users was reduced by as much as 80-90 percent.
• Members of banned communities left Reddit at significantly higher rates than control groups.
• Migration was common, both to similar subreddits (i.e. overtly racist ones) and tangentially related ones (r/The_Donald).
• However, within those communities, hate speech did not reliably increase, although there were slight bumps as the invaders encountered and tested new rules and moderators.

All in all, the researchers conclude, the ban was quite effective at what it set out to do…


link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

Start Up: pricing iPhones, see humans evolve!, why credit systems are broken, Manc-y Oyster, and more

In 2011, Facebook compared political ads on its site to – guess what? Photo by vijay chennupati on Flickr.

Hey web readers: you can sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

A selection of 10 links for you. You can choose not to pay $1,000 for them. I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

AI will soon identify protesters with their faces partly concealed • Motherboard

Louise Matsakis:


A new paper to be presented at the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW) introduces a deep-learning algorithm—a subset of machine learning used to detect and model patterns in large heaps of data—that can identify an individual even when part of their face is obscured. The system was able to correctly identify a person concealed by a scarf 67% of the time when they were photographed against a “complex” background, which better resembles real-world conditions.

The deep-learning algorithm works in a novel way. The researchers, from Cambridge University, India’s National Institute of Technology, and the Indian Institute of Science, first outlined 14 key areas of the face, and then trained a deep-learning model to identify them. The algorithm connects the points into a “star-net structure,” and uses the angles between the points to identify a face. The algorithm can still identify those angles even when part of a person’s mug is obscured, by disguises including caps, scarves, and glasses.

The research has troubling implications for protestors and other dissidents, who often work to make sure they aren’t ID’d at protests and other demonstrations by covering their faces with scarves or by wearing sunglasses. “To be honest when I was trying to come up with this method, I was just trying to focus on criminals,” Amarjot Singh, one of the researchers behind the paper and a Ph.D student at Cambridge University, told me on a phone call.

Singh said he isn’t sure how to prevent the technology from being used by authoritarian regimes in the future.


But note that this is a long way from reliability, or real-time, or anything that would stand up in court. 67% accuracy sounds a lot, but it leaves gigantic holes for doubt. That won’t stop authoritarian regimes using it, of course.

link to this extract

Your next phone will probably cost you $1,000 • Bloomberg

Mark Gurman:


On Tuesday, Apple will introduce its latest top-of-the-line iPhone, and even the cheapest model is expected to cost about $1,000. A few days later, Samsung’s Galaxy Note 8 goes on sale for a comparable amount. The iPhone is expected to be made from glass and stainless steel, while the Note has an exceptionally large, bright screen with a metal-and-glass case. New features for the iPhone will include upgraded cameras and the ability to unlock your phone with a 3D scan of your face. All that stuff has pushed up prices, and there’s a risk that even many longtime early adopters will balk at laying out four figures, including tax.

“A thousand dollars is a line in the sand,” says Ramon Llamas, an analyst at researcher IDC. “There’s going to be a comparison of what $1,000 is to people’s everyday lives, and whether or not that purchase is justified. For some people, $1,000 represents a single paycheck. For others, it represents several weeks of groceries.”


That’s the cheapest model of the top-of-the-line phone, and nobody is forcing you to buy that one. These articles are written as though people were being lined up at the point of bayonets and made to purchase them.

Nice graphic though. The reason why prices keep moving up: it’s where the profit margin is.
link to this extract

Autonomous cars: the level 5 fallacy • Monday Note

Jean-Louis Gassée on the idea that cars will be completely self-driving (“Level 5”):


In prior Monday Notes that discussed electric and autonomous cars, a subject of endless fascination, I evoked scenarios where SD cars can’t cope with circumstances that require human intervention. Today, I’ll offer the pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Hayes and Octavia in San Francisco:

Understandably, the Google Street View picture was taken in the early morning. Now, imagine the 1 pm Sunday scene with crowded sidewalks and sticky car traffic. In today’s world, pedestrians and drivers manage a peaceful if hiccuping coexistence. Through eye contact, nods, hand signals, and, yes, courteous restraint, pedestrians decide to sometimes forfeit their right-of-way and let a few cars come through. On the whole, drivers are equally patient and polite (an unceasing subject of amazement for Parisians walking the streets of San Francisco).

Can we “algorithmicize” eye contact and stuttering restraint? Can an SD car acknowledge a pedestrian’s nod, or negotiate “turning rights” with a conventional vehicle?

No, we can’t. And we don’t appear to have a path to overcome such “mundane” challenges.
But you don’t have to believe me, or think I’m not “with it”. We can listen to Chris Urmson, Google’s Director of Self-Driving Cars from 2013 to late 2016 (he had joined the team in 2009). In a SXSW talk in early 2016, Urmson gives a sobering yet helpful vision of the project’s future, summarized by Lee Gomes in an IEEE Spectrum article [as always, edits and emphasis mine]:


“Not only might it take much longer to arrive than the company has ever indicated — as long as 30 years, said Urmson — but the early commercial versions might well be limited to certain geographies and weather conditions. Self-driving cars are much easier to engineer for sunny weather and wide-open roads, and Urmson suggested the cars might be sold for those markets first.”



link to this extract

How to generate FiveThirtyEight graphs in Python • Dataquest

Alexandru Olteanu:


If you read data science articles, you may have already stumbled upon FiveThirtyEight’s content. Naturally, you were impressed by their awesome visualizations. You wanted to make your own awesome visualizations and so asked Quora and Reddit how to do it. You received some answers, but they were rather vague. You still can’t get the graphs done yourself.

In this post, we’ll help you. Using Python’s matplotlib and pandas, we’ll see that it’s rather easy to replicate the core parts of any FiveThirtyEight (FTE) visualization.

We’ll start here:

And, at the end of the tutorial, arrive here:

To follow along, you’ll need at least some basic knowledge of Python. If you know what’s the difference between methods and attributes, then you’re good to go.


If you’re into Python and graphs, this is what you want.
link to this extract

Taxi medallions, once a safe investment, now drag owners into debt • The New York Times

Winnie Hu:


Owning a yellow cab has left Issa Isac in deep debt and facing a precarious future.

It was not supposed to turn out this way when Mr. Isac slid behind the wheel in 2005. Soon he was earning $200 a night driving. Three years later, he borrowed $335,000 to buy a New York City taxi medallion, which gave him the right to operate his own cab.

But now Mr. Isac earns half of what he did when he started, as riders have defected to Uber and other competitors. He stopped making the $2,700-a-month loan payment on his medallion in February because he was broke. Last month, it was sold to help pay his debts.

“I see my future crashing down,” said Mr. Isac, 46, an immigrant from Burkina Faso. “I worry every day. Sometimes, I can’t sleep thinking about it. Everything changed overnight.”

Taxi ownership once seemed a guaranteed route to financial security, something that was more tangible and reliable than the stock market since people hailed cabs in good times and bad. Generations of new immigrants toiled away for years to earn enough to buy a coveted medallion. Those who had them took pride in them, and viewed them as their retirement fund.

Uber and other ride-hail apps have upended all that.


The New York taxi medallion business is crashing, hard. Difficult not to see this as people who happened to be looking in the wrong direction when the articulated lorry of technological change came down the road.
link to this extract

Our entire credit bureau system is broken • The Verge

Russell Brandom:


It’s easy to point to Equifax [the credit reference agency which was thoroughly hacked] as the problem, and its poor handling of the breach (and possible insider trading) certainly doesn’t help. But the problem is bigger than any single company. In a world flooded with information, we’re still relying on a tiny set of sensitive data to protect us from fraud, and putting the burden on the average consumer when that data leaks out. We treat data as private when it’s already been exposed in breach after breach. This system has reached its breaking point. It’s time to burn it all down and start over.

In the most basic terms, credit bureaus work as a reputation service. You submit someone’s name and get back a report on all the money they’ve borrowed over the years and how it’s been repaid. That’s valuable information if you’re deciding whether to lend someone money, so businesses (or their customers) are often willing to pay for it. In that situation, the biggest risk to the lender is an impostor who runs up someone else’s tab and then skips town. So along the way, credit bureaus have become an identity service, too. Along with the potential client’s name, they ask for a Social Security number, and if those things don’t match, they know they’re dealing with fraud.

This is a terrible way to manage identity. From afar, a Social Security number looks kind of like a password. But you can change a password, and you shouldn’t use the same one with every service. To get slightly more technical, you can hash passwords, which lets services verify your identity without keeping your exact password easily available. Right now, I could count the number of places my Gmail password exists anywhere on one hand, whereas I’ve been writing my Social Security number on forms since I was 12. By now, hundreds of organizations have it, from old jobs to old dentists. That number was never going to be safe from scammers. The system was set up for failure from the very beginning.


Powerful, and spot-on, piece.
link to this extract

Massive genetic study shows how humans are evolving • Nature News & Comment

Bruno Martin:


A huge genetic study that sought to pinpoint how the human genome is evolving suggests that natural selection is getting rid of harmful genetic mutations that shorten people’s lives. The work, published in PLoS Biology1, analysed DNA from 215,000 people and is one of the first attempts to probe directly how humans are evolving over one or two generations.

To identify which bits of the human genome might be evolving, researchers scoured large US and UK genetic databases for mutations whose prevalence changed across different age groups. For each person, the parents’ age of death was recorded as a measure of longevity, or their own age in some cases.

“If a genetic variant influences survival, its frequency should change with the age of the surviving individuals,” says Hakhamanesh Mostafavi, an evolutionary biologist at Columbia University in New York City who led the study. People who carry a harmful genetic variant die at a higher rate, so the variant becomes rarer in the older portion of the population.

Mostafavi and his colleagues tested more than 8 million common mutations, and found two that seemed to become less prevalent with age. A variant of the APOE gene, which is strongly linked to Alzheimer’s disease, was rarely found in women over 70. And a mutation in the CHRNA3 gene associated with heavy smoking in men petered out in the population starting in middle age. People without these mutations have a survival edge and are more likely to live longer, the researchers suggest.

This is not, by itself, evidence of evolution at work. In evolutionary terms, having a long life isn’t as important as having a reproductively fruitful one, with many children who survive into adulthood and birth their own offspring. So harmful mutations that exert their effects after reproductive age could be expected to be ‘neutral’ in the eyes of evolution, and not selected against.

But if that were the case, there would be plenty of such mutations still kicking around in the genome, the authors argue.


link to this extract

Google appeals against EU’s €2.4bn fine over search engine results • The Guardian

Daniel Boffey:


Google is appealing against the record €2.4bn (£2.2bn) fine imposed by the European Union for its abuse of its dominance of the search engine market in building its shopping comparison service.

The world’s most popular internet search engine has launched its appeal after it was fined by the European commission for what was described as an “old school” form of illegality.

The Luxembourg-based general court, Europe’s second-highest, is expected to take several years before ruling on Google’s appeal, which had been widely expected. The Silicon Valley giant had responded to the fine at the time of its announcement by saying that it “respectfully” disagreed with the legal argument being pursued.


But still has to stop boosting its shopping service in contravention of EC rules; has until 28 September to comply. The EC is looking at its proposal on this, apparently.
link to this extract

May 2011: Facebook: exempt us from federal election commission rules • POLITICO

Jennifer Epstein, in May 2011:


Facebook, the company that has helped put so much of what was once private out in open on the web, is looking for a sort of corporate privacy setting of its own — the company is looking to ensure that it is exempt from federal election rules requiring campaign advertisements to include disclosures of who paid for them.

In a request to the Federal Election Commission made late last month, lawyers for the social networking powerhouse argued that the small ads on Facebook’s website should not have to include disclosures because of the limited amounts of room for text.

While it’s easy to include disclosures on a television ad, billboard or email, Facebook argues, it’s more difficult with the tiny ads posted along the side of its webpages. “With some mediums … – e.g. bumper stickers, buttons, pens, T-shirts, concert tickets, and text messages – it is inconvenient or impracticable to include a disclaimer,” three lawyers from the Washington office of the firm Perkins Coie write in their request for an advisory opinion from the FEC.

The company says it has made a conscious decision to keep the ads on its site small and less obtrusive to the user experience, and does not want to take away from that experience or penalize campaign advertisers. “Facebook gives a wide range of candidates and causes a voice where they would otherwise not be able to afford one through more traditional political advertising,” spokesman Andrew Noyes said in a statement to POLITICO. “We encourage the FEC to consider these benefits and other fundamental differences between some online ad formats and newspaper and TV advertising.”


Facebook was in effect claiming that its ads – including the political ones – are the equivalent of skywriting (which doesn’t need disclosure about who paid for it). The FEC agreed. This, of course, turns out to have been a significant turning point, even though nobody saw it at the time.

Imagine if all the political ads on Facebook in the 2016 election had had to declare who bought them. The discourse around the company would be very different. (Twitter too have used this get-out, I believe.)
link to this extract

A beginner’s guide to using My Get Me There • Medium

Susil Nash on “Manchester’s hilarious attempt at reinventing London’s Oyster” (the latter, for Americans, is an RFID system which can be used to pay contactlessly for trips on buses and underground; it’s worked, pretty much perfectly, since 2004:


The first of the new system’s fun quirks is that My Get Me There isn’t just a card. It’s an app too. Now, you might think that’s to be expected — it’s a convenient way to manage your card, right? The two work together in harmony, right? Wrong. The app and the (presumably ironically-named) ‘Smart Card’ are two completely separate systems that work entirely independently of one another.

Your first decision is therefore whether to opt for the app, the Smart Card or, as will be the case for most travellers, both. The app is certainly less tricky to get hold of (more on that in a moment) but the significant downside is that it can only be used on Metrolink — Manchester’s tram network. Which means no smartphone fun for Team Bus or the vehicle-agnostics, but app-tastic news for all tram devotees.
Having said that, there are a couple of things that even you dedicated Metrolinkers should watch out for before ditching the paper tix. Firstly, know that you’ll need to make sure you’re not low on battery when heading out the door because, if your phone gives up mid-travels, you could be hit with a £100 fine. Secondly, you’ll need to remain online… ish. The reason for the ‘ish’ is that you don’t actually need web access to use the app once you’ve bought your ticket. However, any tickets on your phone will expire if that device “has not been connected to the internet for a long period” (that’s literally the timescale specified on their website).

So do make sure your phone has a plenty of juice and has been connected to the internet at least once in the most recent ‘long period’.


Even worse: it’s not a top-up scheme. It’s a “specific tickets for specific journeys” system. And you have to be over 16. It’s as if they wanted to keep cash forever.
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

Start Up: video game gamblers collared, ethics of machine learning, Wi-Fi tube maps, and more

Hurricane Irma has caused devastation through the Caribbean – but been a boon for a walkie-talkie app. Photo by anttilipponen on Flickr.

You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

A selection of 14 links for you. Use them wisely. I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

Video game influencers settle FTC complaint over endorsement • Rolling Stone

Brian Crecente:


Two well-known social media influencers have reached a tentative agreement with the Federal Trade Commission over charges that they deceptively endorsed gambling site CSGOLotto – and paid others to do so – without disclosing that they owned the company itself.

CSGOLotto owners Trevor “TmarTn” Martin and Thomas “Syndicate” Cassel agreed to a deal in which they promise to report all of their activity to the FTC and disclose connections with endorsers. While the deal doesn’t require the two to admit any culpability nor does it include a fine, future infractions could cost more than $40,000 per violation, according to an FTC spokesperson who spoke with Glixel about the case.

Under the FTC Act, according to the spokesperson, the commission typically can’t assess civil penalties on the first violation. Today’s consent agreement will be subject to public comment until October 10th, at which point the commission will decide whether to make the order final…

…”The goal of the FTC isn’t to be a punitive or draconian agency,” FTC spokesman Mitchell J. Katz says. “We are here to educate consumers about new markets.”


Come on. Does anyone seriously think these two believed it was all above board to do this? And as for the FTC: maybe rethink that mission statement. Especially when it comes to gambling – which can quickly turn into ruinously addictive behaviour – it’s entirely correct to be punitive and draconian. And when you have gambling mixed with deception, it’s hammer time.
link to this extract

Is this research ethical? • Light Blue Touchpaper

Professor Ross Anderson:


The Economist features face recognition on its front page, reporting that deep neural networks can now tell whether you’re straight or gay better than humans can just by looking at your face. The research they cite is a preprint, available here.

Its authors Kosinski and Wang downloaded thousands of photos from a dating site, ran them through a standard feature-extraction program, then classified gay vs straight using a standard statistical classifier, which they found could tell the men seeking men from the men seeking women. My students pretty well instantly called this out as selection bias; if gay men consider boyish faces to be cuter, then they will upload their most boyish photo. The paper authors suggest their finding may support a theory that sexuality is influenced by fetal testosterone levels, but when you don’t control for such biases your results may say more about social norms than about phenotypes.

Quite apart from the scientific value of the research, which is perhaps best assessed by specialists, I’m concerned with the ethics and privacy aspects. I am surprised that the paper doesn’t report having been through ethical review; the authors consider that photos on a dating website are public information and appear to assume that privacy issues simply do not arise.

Yet UK courts decided, in Campbell v Mirror, that privacy could be violated even by photos taken on the public street, and European courts have come to similar conclusions in I v Finland and elsewhere.


Anderson, as ever, raises important questions. (The privacy topic will probably get ignored until someone – a famous model? – brings a big case. Then the boilerplate on the dating site or whatever will be changed to force you to give up your rights. Or the dating site will sue the maker of the AI for some of the profits.)
link to this extract


London Underground Wifi tracking: here’s everything we learned from TfL’s official report • Gizmodo UK

James O’Malley on the findings from TfL’s Wi-Fi pilot tracking scheme:


TfL was also able to see how disruptions impacted stations too: Apparently when mega-congested, the walk times increased from 3 minutes to more than ten minutes. Which creates a whole array of second-order problems for the poor staff on the ground trying to squeeze everyone in.

The wifi data also enables TfL to generate more accurate data on crowding in stations. The above graph compares the number of Oyster touch-ins with wireless device detections over the course of the day.

Previously, how busy a station was could only be measured using Oyster touch in data but there’s a fairly big flaw in using this: There’s a fairly hard limit on how many people can use a set of ticket barriers at any one time. So measuring it by touch-ins doesn’t account for hundreds or thousands of grumpy commuters in the queue.


This is going to be enormously useful for planning. You can see how it might also be helpful for buses; offering free Wi-Fi on buses would serve some of the same purposes. (If you offered it at bus stops, though, you’d get people who didn’t intend to get on the bus..)
link to this extract

Amazon was tricked by fake law firm into removing hot product, costing seller $200K • CNBC

Eugene Kim:


Shortly before Amazon Prime Day in July, the owner of the Brushes4Less store on Amazon’s marketplace received a suspension notice for his best-selling product, a toothbrush head replacement.

The email that landed in his inbox said the product was being delisted from the site because of an intellectual property violation. In order to resolve the matter and get the product reinstated, the owner would have to contact the law firm that filed the complaint.

But there was one problem: the firm didn’t exist.

Brushes4Less was given the contact information for an entity named Wesley & McCain in Pittsburgh. The website has profiles for five lawyers. A Google image search shows that all five actually work for the law firm Brydon, Swearengen & England in Jefferson City, Missouri…

…The owner of Brushes4Less agreed to tell his story to CNBC but asked that we not use his name out of concern for his privacy. As far as he can tell, and based on what CNBC could confirm, Amazon was duped into shutting down the seller’s key product days before the site’s busiest shopping event ever.

“Just five minutes of detective work would have found this website is a fraud, but Amazon doesn’t seem to want to do any of that,” the owner said. “This is like the Wild Wild West of intellectual property complaints.”


I’m hearing more and more complaints about how Amazon behaves, both here and through its promotions. Once more, the problem is: what alternative do you have?
link to this extract

Tesla extended the range of some Florida vehicles for drivers to escape Hurricane Irma – The Verge

Andrew Liptak:


As Hurricane Irma bears down on Florida, Tesla issued an over-the-air update to drivers in the state that unlocks the full battery capacity of its 60 and 70 kilowatt-hour Model S and X vehicles. The update provides those trying to escape the path of the storm with an additional 30 to 40 miles above the typical range of the vehicle, according to Electrek.

Tesla’s 60 and 60D vehicles offer a range of just above 200 miles on a charge. Faced with an order to leave, one Tesla owner contacted the company, saying that they needed an additional 30 miles of range to get out of the mandatory evacuation zone they were in. In response, the company issued an update to other drivers in the state, providing them with the full 75 kWh capacity of their vehicles through September 16th. One driver posted a screenshot of his app, which showed off the new extended range. A Tesla spokesperson confirmed that the company’s 70kWh vehicles also received the update.


So what’s to stop someone trying to figure out what the software update does, and applying that to their battery firmware? (Maybe it’s signed with a Tesla cryptographic key?) This seems really strange – that the only difference is a few lines of code, and that the low-end car is intentionally hobbled not through physics but software. And what Tesla can give, it can take away. That’s scary too.
link to this extract

As Hurricane Irma devastates, walkie talkie app Zello adds six million users in a week • Buzzfeed

Alex Kantrowitz:


Zello is used almost exactly like a walkie talkie, except it relies on wifi and cell service, so it can support big groups of people in dispersed locations. When Harvey caused widespread devastation in and around Houston, volunteers leaned on Zello to coordinate search and rescue efforts. And people in the path of Irma seem to believe they can put the app to similar uses in this storm too.

Zello has added six million new registered users since Monday, the company’s CEO, Bill Moore, told BuzzFeed News, and is now the top free app on the iOS App Store. The app is supporting a few massive groups dedicated to Irma relief, including the 1,800+ member South Florida Hurricane Irma channel.

“With the crush of new users and emergency situations, most of the Zello team is working long days either maintaining capacity or helping with customer support,” Moore said.

As Zello’s usage grows, it risks getting overloaded and becoming less useful to rescuers. The South Florida group, for instance, seemed to contain a mixture of useful information and chaos Saturday evening. “We’re not Google, we’re not the National Weather Service,” one administrator told the group after a number of requests for weather updates.


Question is, will anyone use it in a month’s time?
link to this extract

Hurricane Irma and tax havens • Progressive Economics Group

Richard Murphy:


Although it will take time for the full impact of Hurricane Irma to become apparent, it is clear that it will create significant damage in the British Overseas Territories of Anguilla, The British Virgin Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands. It has already done that on Antigua and Barbuda and may also do so to The Bahamas, both of which are Commonwealth states to which the UK has at least a moral obligation.

There is also risk to Bermuda and St Kitts and Nevis, which are also British Overseas Territories.  It is thought that well over half of all buildings in Barbuda have been subject to substantial hurricane inflicted damage.

It is beholden on the UK to provide all aid necessary to restore normal life in its Overseas Territories, without delay. There are good reasons for suggesting that it should provide similar assistance to affected Commonwealth States. That said, there is no reason why this support should be supplied unconditionally. 

All the places mentioned are secrecy jurisdictions (tax havens) as indicated by the Tax Justice Network’s influential Financial Secrecy Index. What this means is that these places, without exception, have deliberately created regulation for the primary benefit and use of people who are not resident in those islands, and knowing that that regulation in question will be used to undermine the legislation or regulation of another jurisdiction. 


You can probably guess what comes next, but I won’t spoil the surprise.
link to this extract

Partisanship, propaganda, and disinformation: online media and the 2016 US presidential election • Berkman Klein Center


In this study, we analyze both mainstream and social media coverage of the 2016 United States presidential election. We document that the majority of mainstream media coverage was negative for both candidates, but largely followed Donald Trump’s agenda: when reporting on Hillary Clinton, coverage primarily focused on the various scandals related to the Clinton Foundation and emails. When focused on Trump, major substantive issues, primarily immigration, were prominent. Indeed, immigration emerged as a central issue in the campaign and served as a defining issue for the Trump campaign.

We find that the structure and composition of media on the right and left are quite different. The leading media on the right and left are rooted in different traditions and journalistic practices. On the conservative side, more attention was paid to pro-Trump, highly partisan media outlets. On the liberal side, by contrast, the center of gravity was made up largely of long-standing media organizations steeped in the traditions and practices of objective journalism.

Our data supports lines of research on polarization in American politics that focus on the asymmetric patterns between the left and the right, rather than studies that see polarization as a general historical phenomenon, driven by technology or other mechanisms that apply across the partisan divide.


And yes, Facebook and Twitter are in there.
link to this extract

Seriously, Equifax? Why the credit agency’s breach means regulation is needed • The New York Times

Farhad Manjoo is angry:


If a bank lost everyone’s money, regulators might try to shut down the bank. If an accounting firm kept shoddy books, its licenses to practice accounting could be revoked. (See how Texas pulled Arthur Andersen’s license after the Enron debacle.)

So if a data-storage credit agency loses pretty much everyone’s data, why should it be allowed to store anyone’s data any longer?

Here’s one troubling reason: Because even after one of the gravest breaches in history, no one is really in a position to stop Equifax from continuing to do business as usual. And the problem is bigger than Equifax: We really have no good way, in public policy, to exact some existential punishment on companies that fail to safeguard our data. There will be hacks — and afterward, there will be more.

Experts said it was highly unlikely that any regulatory body would shut Equifax down over this breach. As one of the nation’s three major credit-reporting agencies, which store and analyze consumers’ financial history for credit decisions, it is likely to be considered too central to the American financial system; Equifax’s demise would both reduce competition in the industry and make each of the two survivors a bigger target. Raj Joshi, an analyst at Moody’s, said in a note to investors that Equifax was likely to be fine, as “the impact of the security breach will only modestly erode its solid credit metrics and liquidity.”

The two regulators that do have jurisdiction over Equifax, the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, declined to comment on any potential punishments over the credit agency’s breach.


Too critical to fail. And you can’t stop Equifax from getting more of your data. This, and antitrust, are two examples where the law, and punishment, just isn’t up to the problems that can follow – which are outsourced to all the company’s users, instead of the company.
link to this extract

Equifax breach response turns dumpster fire • Krebs On Security

Brian Krebs:


Yesterday’s story here pointed out the gross conflict of interest in Equifax’s consumer remedy for this breach: Offering a year’s worth of free credit monitoring services to all Americans via its own in-house credit monitoring service.

This is particularly rich because a) why should anyone trust Equifax to do anything right security-wise after this debacle and b) these credit monitoring services typically hard-sell consumers to sign up for paid credit protection plans when the free coverage expires.

I have repeatedly urged readers to consider putting a security freeze on their accounts in lieu of or in addition to accepting these free credit monitoring offers, noting that credit monitoring services don’t protect you against identity theft (the most you can hope for is they alert you when ID thieves do steal your identity), while security freezes can prevent thieves from taking out new lines of credit in your name.

Several readers have written in to point out some legalese in the terms of service the Equifax requires all users to acknowledge before signing up for the service seems to include legal verbiage suggesting that those who do sign up for the free service will waive their rights to participate in future class action lawsuits against the company.

KrebsOnSecurity is still awaiting word from an actual lawyer who’s looking at this contract, but let me offer my own two cents on this.

Update, 9:45 p.m. ET: Equifax has updated their breach alert page to include the following response in regard to the unclear legalese:

“In response to consumer inquiries, we have made it clear that the arbitration clause and class action waiver included in the Equifax and TrustedID Premier terms of use does not apply to this cybersecurity incident.”

Original story:

Equifax will almost certainly see itself the target of multiple class action lawsuits as a result of this breach, but there is no guarantee those lawsuits will go the distance and result in a monetary windfall for affected consumers.


link to this extract

U.S. spies think the FBI is botching the Kaspersky investigation • Cyberscoop

Patrick Howell O’Neill:


U.S. spies believe FBI agents have mismanaged the ongoing counterintelligence investigation into Moscow-based cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab, current and former senior U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell CyberScoop.

Officials tell CyberScoop they believe the FBI has engaged in deliberate media leaks and overblown classified congressional briefings to build the case around Kaspersky. These officials also say the FBI should be more covert in its efforts to persuade private companies to uninstall Kaspersky software. A quieter operation would help avoid putting the rest of the intelligence community — especially agencies engaged in cyber-operations — in the crosshairs for retaliation, the officials say.

The FBI has briefed private sector companies across several industries, urging them to cut ties with Kaspersky on security grounds, CyberScoop reported last week. On some occasions, the FBI’s outreach efforts in the U.S. have been successful. At least one major American energy firm recently opted against signing a significant business deal with Kaspersky due in large part to the bureau’s briefings. Larger, brand-name technology giants have generally been less receptive and cooperative with the FBI.

The reaction from inside the U.S. intelligence community to the FBI’s work on Kaspersky has been mixed and, at times, disapproving. While there is general agreement among the intelligence agencies that Kaspersky is connected to and works with Russian spies, senior U.S. intelligence officials disapprove of the bureau’s handling of the years-long issue.


The Kaspersky aspersions had passed me by, but this is pretty amazing. Kaspersky denies any connection with the Russian government.
link to this extract

Samsung sees its best Note preorders with the new Galaxy Note8 • Samsung Newsroom


Samsung Electronics America announced today [Sept 8] that more people in the US have purchased the Galaxy Note8 than previous Samsung Note phones during the same time period. Introduced on August 23, the Galaxy Note8 — featuring the largest ever screen in a Note device, an enhanced S Pen1, and the world’s first smartphone with two 12MP rear cameras with Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on both the wide-angle and telephoto lenses — will be available in stores on September 15.

“We’re thrilled to see the strong consumer response to the next level Note,” said Tim Baxter, president and chief executive officer, Samsung Electronics North America. “Today’s consumers want to do bigger things in work and life, and Note helps make that possible. We built the Galaxy Note8 for people who desire a device that lets them be productive and allows for self-expression.”


The Note 7 was actually introduced a few days earlier last year, on August 19. You don’t have to think too hard to realise why the Note 8 would have record orders, though. Everyone who wanted to have a Note 7 last year couldn’t get one (or if they did get one, had to get it back). They’ve had to make do with something else, but they probably really wanted the Note 7, as indicated by the low defection rate from Samsung when it was recalled. So there’s a ton of wanted-to-be-Note-7 owners who will dump their existing phones for this.

And then there’s all the people who would have upgraded anyway; perhaps they own the Note 5, or something else, and would have been in line to get it (while in the alternative universe where the Note 7 didn’t catch fire, Note 7 owners hung on to their devices).

In other words, it would almost be surprising if there weren’t record orders for the Note 8; I’d expect this story to be repeated around the globe. It’s good news for Samsung, whose financials compared to last year will look Godzilla-like.
link to this extract

Worldwide brand motherboard shipments continue to fall • Digitimes

Monica Chen and Joseph Tsai:


Worldwide brand motherboard shipments are expected to reach only 45m units in 2017 and may drop further in 2018 as related demand continues shrinking, according to sources from the upstream supply chain.

Worldwide brand motherboard shipments were 75m units in 2013, but slipped below 50m units in 2016. Since motherboard demand from China, which had been the main growth driver in the past few years, is dropping significantly, shipments are expected to remain in decline in 2017.

Gigabyte Technology is also expected to see its motherboard shipments drop below 13m units in 2017. In addition to China’s weakening demand, competition from Asustek has also grown fiercer, the sources noted.


These figures roughly track the decline in the overall PC market (2013: 315m; 2016: 261m), and are also a declining ratio of that number. Building your own PC was always a minority sport; now it looks endangered.
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

Start Up: the rehab scammers, ultrasonic hacking, India’s biometric nightmare, HTC breaks up?, and more

Winning nuclear standoffs mostly consists of not getting into nuclear standoffs. Photo by vaXzine on Flickr.

You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

A selection of 10 links for you. Satisfied? I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

How disreputable rehabs game Google to profit off patients • The Verge

Cat Ferguson:


Leasha Ali had been drunk for the last two days, but she didn’t want to be anymore. The 39-year-old math teacher and mother of two was in a spiral familiar to anyone who’s struggled with addiction. A difficult event — a hospitalization, thanks to lingering symptoms from a birth defect — had stressed her to the breaking point, and then she’d gotten home and found herself alone in her house, depressed and unable to sleep. After a few days without drinking, she gave in, and spent the next 48 hours on a bender.

On the second night, January 8th of this year, she got an email from the hospital. Her liver enzymes had been dangerously high — even before the days of abuse. The birth defect that put her in the hospital had already left her with several damaged organs. Afraid of hurting another, she searched the test results in Google. Right there at the top was an ad for rehab.

“I thought to myself, ‘Oh my God, even Google knows I need rehab,’” Ali told me.

It’s hard to say exactly who was on the other end, when, just before 11PM, Ali called the number in the ad. The 800 number was ephemeral. It’s missing from Yellow Pages listings, social media, and even sites for complaints about telemarketers and spam, and it was disconnected by the time I called it. The untraceability is frustrating, but not surprising. Google offers advertisers unique “tracking” phone numbers that forward to a company’s phones, so they can understand which ads are bringing in the most clients. The phone numbers only stay up as long as the ad does…

…Open another tab, and Google “alcohol rehab near me.” Take a look at the ads up top. (If you have an ad blocker, you’ll have to turn it off.)

If you’re in Arizona, and you click on the top ad, you’ll cost that advertiser around $221. If you’re in Colorado, that click costs the site $230. Sorry, New Yorkers, your click is only worth $43 — but if you searched “drug treatment centers,” you’d go for around $121. (These are estimated averages from April this year, provided to The Verge by advertising analytics company SEMrush.)

That’s assuming you don’t live in a city with a high percentage of Medicaid recipients. In New Jersey, the statewide cost for ads on “best alcohol rehab centers” searches is $190 per click, but that’s an average. Smart marketers tell Google they don’t want their ads showing up in any searches from Trenton, Camden, or other low-income cities. It’s also good practice, if you’re hoping to attract well-heeled (or at least well-insured) clients, to keep your ads away from searches with words like “free” and “Medicaid.”

Of course, there are other ways to prevent poor people from calling your hotline.


link to this extract

A simple design flaw makes it astoundingly easy to hack Siri and Alexa • FastCo Design

Mark Wilson:


Using a technique called the DolphinAttack, a team from Zhejiang University translated typical vocal commands into ultrasonic frequencies that are too high for the human ear to hear, but perfectly decipherable by the microphones and software powering our always-on voice assistants. This relatively simple translation process lets them take control of gadgets with just a few words uttered in frequencies none of us can hear.

The researchers didn’t just activate basic commands like “Hey Siri” or “Okay Google,” though. They could also tell an iPhone to “call 1234567890” or tell an iPad to FaceTime the number. They could force a Macbook or a Nexus 7 to open a malicious website. They could order an Amazon Echo to “open the backdoor” (a pin would also be required, an August spokesperson clarifies). Even an Audi Q3 could have its navigation system redirected to a new location. “Inaudible voice commands question the common design assumption that adversaries may at most try to manipulate a [voice assistant] vocally and can be detected by an alert user,” the research team writes in a paper just accepted to the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security.

In other words, Silicon Valley has designed human-friendly UI with a huge security oversight. While we might not hear the bad guys talking, our computers clearly can. “From a UX point of view, it feels like a betrayal,” says Ame Elliott, design director at the nonprofit SimplySecure. “The premise of how you interact with the device is ‘tell it what to do,’ so the silent, surreptitious command is shocking.”


We’ve had something similar previously, though that was in the audible spectrum. The problem is that some of these devices use ultrasonic frequencies for pairing.
link to this extract

How to win a nuclear standoff • FiveThirtyEight

Oliver Roeder:


Imagine you’re Trump or Kim Jong Un, essentially playing a game of chicken. You’re driving at high speed directly toward your opponent who’s also racing toward you. Neither of you wants to chicken out and veer away, but neither wants to die, either. Your best strategy? Rip off your steering wheel, make sure your opponent knows you’ve done so, and hit the gas.

That’s the terrifying thing about game theory: Sometimes the most rational choice can feel like the most dangerous. And that’s a problem when there are nukes involved. In the old days, if my country had better archers than yours, you’d keep that in mind when you felt like going to war with me. But nuclear weapons don’t work like archers. They decouple raw military strength from a state’s ability to win a war. That’s why North Korea, a country smaller than Mississippi with a GDP roughly equal to Wyoming’s, gets to compete alongside a superpower like the U.S. “What matters is if they can launch ICBMs to destroy Los Angeles or Chicago or Washington or wherever,” James Fearon, a political scientist at Stanford, told me.

Either you have nukes or you don’t. Either you use nukes or you don’t. It’s not a competition with arms or battlefields any more. It’s a competition in risk taking.

Fearon is the author of a 1995 paper called “Rationalist Explanations for War.” A modern classic in its field, it begins: “The central puzzle about war, and also the main reason why we study it, is that wars are costly but nonetheless wars recur.” In the paper, Fearon argues that there are two main reasons why wars break out. First, players have private information, and incentives to misrepresent that information. Second, the players have commitment problems.

Our $100 game [in which two players write a number from 0 to 100; the higher number wins, but the lower number is used to calculate the percentage risk that both players must burn $10,000 of their own money; so if you write 100 and your opponent 99, there’s a 99% chance you both burn the cash], which Fearon teaches to his undergraduates, revolves around those two ideas. My private information is my appetite for risk. How much of it am I willing to take on to try and win the $100? You have no idea, and vice versa. And neither of us can really commit to a peaceful or bellicose strategy and make the other side believe it. The secret envelope and our unceasing self-interest stops that. That’s a commitment problem.

In our $100 game and in nuclear standoff, there’s no easy way to rip out the steering wheel.


Fearon says that with North Korea, people aren’t sure what its $100 would be. (People aren’t thinking hard enough. For North Korea, the $100 is easier trade.)
link to this extract

TalkTalk plans to bail on mobile in major shake-up for beleaguered biz • The Register

Kat Hall:


Beleaguered UK comms provider TalkTalk is set to go against the received “wisdom” of having multiple services to flog as it plans to pull out of the mobile market entirely.

The move is a fairly significant change of tack given that not so long ago it had targeted four million mobile customers. TalkTalk now has just 913,000 SIM customers. Chief exec Tristia Harrison said the company wants to refocus on its core strength as a “fixed-line business” and reassess its mobile strategy.

No doubt she hopes concentrating on broadband will help boost the company’s lacklustre results, with revenues continuing to decline by 3% to £1.7bn for the full-year 2016/17.

The plans are part of a shake-up following founder Charles Dunstone’s return as chair after chief exec Dido Harding resigned earlier this year.


Likely buyer for those mobile customers is Three, the smallest of the UK carriers.
link to this extract

India’s biometric database is a massive achievement and a dystopian nightmare • VICE News

David Gilbert:


Seven years ago nearly 400 million people in India did not exist in the eyes of the government. They were “ghosts” who had no identity and no way of getting one, says Sahil Kini, one of the architects of India’s controversial Aadhaar database. In a country trying to modernize on the fly and take its place among the world’s superpowers, this massive yet unknown population presented a huge problem.

So the Indian government set out on an ambitious course to build Aadhaar, the world’s largest biometric database, which would not only allow these people to participate more fully in society but also become a shining beacon of technological achievement for the rest of the world.

“What’s forgotten is that before Aadhaar was built there were 400 million people in India that did not have any form of identity; they were ghosts in the system,” Kini told VICE News. “So if you had to give them any kind of subsidy, you couldn’t, because they didn’t exist on paper.”

But as the database grew to include almost all of India’s 1.3 billion citizens, cracks began to appear, and in recent months those cracks have become chasms. Now more and more Indians say they worry that what the government actually created in Aadhaar is an all-seeing surveillance apparatus that has serious holes in its security and can be used to monitor all aspects of their lives.


Remarkable piece of research and journalism. Aadhaar is the results of good intentions gone wrong.
link to this extract

Donald Trump is the first white president • The Atlantic

Ta-Nehisi Coates:


To Trump, whiteness is neither notional nor symbolic but is the very core of his power. In this, Trump is not singular. But whereas his forebears carried whiteness like an ancestral talisman, Trump cracked the glowing amulet open, releasing its eldritch energies. The repercussions are striking: Trump is the first president to have served in no public capacity before ascending to his perch. But more telling, Trump is also the first president to have publicly affirmed that his daughter is a “piece of ass.” The mind seizes trying to imagine a black man extolling the virtues of sexual assault on tape (“When you’re a star, they let you do it”), fending off multiple accusations of such assaults, immersed in multiple lawsuits for allegedly fraudulent business dealings, exhorting his followers to violence, and then strolling into the White House. But that is the point of white supremacy—to ensure that that which all others achieve with maximal effort, white people (particularly white men) achieve with minimal qualification. Barack Obama delivered to black people the hoary message that if they work twice as hard as white people, anything is possible. But Trump’s counter is persuasive: Work half as hard as black people, and even more is possible.

For Trump, it almost seems that the fact of Obama, the fact of a black president, insulted him personally. The insult intensified when Obama and Seth Meyers publicly humiliated him at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in 2011. But the bloody heirloom ensures the last laugh. Replacing Obama is not enough—Trump has made the negation of Obama’s legacy the foundation of his own.


Powerful essay. Trump is the anti-Obama, in so many ways.
link to this extract

Google reportedly in final stages of buying HTC’s smartphone business • Digital Trends

Christian de Looper:


The Google Pixel was one of the best-loved phones of 2016, and according to recent reports, it looks like the company could be set to seriously bolster its smartphone business. How? By buying someone else’s smartphone business. According to a recent report, from Commercial Times, Google and HTC have entered the final stages of discussions that could ultimately lead to Google buying out HTC’s smartphone business.

It’s important to note that Google won’t buy HTC as a whole — just its smartphone business. The HTC brand will still live on, and the report noted that the company may refocus its attention on virtual reality after selling off its mobile arm.

Of course, this isn’t the first time Google has made such a purchase. The company bought out Motorola back in 2012 for a whopping $12.5bn, and at the time it was suspected that the company could end up merging the Android and Motorola teams. In the end, that didn’t happen — and instead, a few years later, Google sold the Motorola brand to Lenovo at a pretty huge loss.

This time around, however, things could be different.


Things will be different inasmuch as HTC is nowhere near as big as Motorola. Not mentioned: HTC made the first Android phone, the G1. Hard to see HTC being profitable on the VR side, though. Volumes too low, unit price too high, competition too fierce.
link to this extract

When the truth is messy and hard • Context: By New America

Anne-Marie Slaughter, chief executive of New America, which …let go Barry Flynn and the Open Markets team after Flynn praised the EC’s fine of Google:


We tell all of our donors that they cannot control the results of what they fund; we do not do contract research. But we also develop and maintain relationships with our donors as does any nonprofit institution.

So there’s the tension. In practice, with an employee who had already surprised his colleagues unpleasantly — and many would say dishonestly — in the past, it meant that I wanted to see a press release before it went out. That is the reason that the Open Markets statement went up and then was taken down. It was posted before I had a chance to give it a final review. Indeed, I was talking to Barry about it on the phone when it went up. I have never — nor would I ever — censor anything, but I might ask questions about accuracy or tone.

And, in this case, I wanted to give the funder a heads up that it was coming and send it over ourselves. That seems like a defensible minimum courtesy that an institution can offer its funders: we’re about to do something you are really not going to like, but at least we are telling you about it. I recognize that the best journalists operate on a different principle — notice seems to imply interference. But we are not a newspaper, yet we try to uphold the best journalistic standards in our writing.


She’s wrong about the “notice seems to imply interference”. Journalists are generally obliged to put accusations or claims to organisations which are accused of things in news reports. (Hence how Slaughter was quoted in the NYT article about Lynn being dumped.) In opinion pieces, like Flynn’s, that’s not the case. That’s because they’re opinions. News organisations don’t send people who are about to be criticised in opinion pieces a copy seeking a response. Slaughter has it exactly backwards.
link to this extract

A furious think-tank boss, Google, and an academic ‘fired’ for criticizing ads giant • The Register

Kieren McCarthy takes the above post to the ethical cleaners:


Slaughter defends her right to see and sign off on public statements from employees before she defends their independence. And she paints Lynn’s failure to give her advance notice of his critical statement as a sign that he has breached loyalty.

She even makes it plain that she was prepared to insist on changes to Lynn’s statement before giving approval for publication – which no doubt is precisely why Lynn felt he needed to “publish and be damned,” knowing that any strong claim that the US authorities need to dig into Google’s businesses was liable to meet interference from Slaughter.

And that is almost the textbook definition of how soft power works: by ensuring self-censorship.

The fact is that if the financial relationship with Google and Schmidt wasn’t there, and if Slaughter wasn’t an old friend of Schmidt’s, there would not have been any concern over Lynn’s statement in the first place. It was, after all, a personal statement from a think tank: hardly draft legislation or anti-trust charges.

That Lynn felt the need to push his statement out without going through Slaughter, and the fact that she had such a strong reaction when he didn’t, combined with the virtual certainty that Schmidt called soon after to express his annoyance, is as clear an example of soft money influence as you will ever find.


link to this extract

How Verrit’s “authentication codes” expose Peter Daou’s continuing ineptitude • Medium

Jon Hendren is unimpressed by Verrit, a site which has quotes with “authentication codes” and is the latest idea from Daou, who is a big noise in the US Democratic party:


Let’s pretend for a minute that the concept of Verrit were a good one. No, really, just play along. If you must have a “code” to accompany a quote or a blurb, then the code should be something — anything — that can be used even in some small part outside of Perhaps first, an identifier of the person or entity being quoted (Hillary would be #000001, obviously), a date code for when it was uttered, and a few more digits as an index in case the person said many quotable things that day. Now when I want to verify that Bernie (identifier #000666 perhaps) said “I’m going to give away ponies” on whatever-the-hell day — I can then look that up in a thousand places that aren’t a WordPress installation on (Wait, I think I just invented sourcing one’s quotes.)

Or how about a checksum of the quote? Or if you want to get really fancy, do some steganography on those social images and build a validator so people can upload suspected images they found online to see if they are legitimately from Verrit and not from one of the thousands of people making fun of Verrit.

You can nerd this up in a number of ways that are actually useful, maybe. Hell, you want to validate a continuing series of accurate statements? Get the blockchain in here, that’s what it’s for.
I get what Daou and others believe they are marketing toward — there really is a population out there that is confused about how the content they are reading is created. There are certainly voters who don’t know how to tell real news from fake, and this authentication scheme is a grab at making those people feel a little better about what they read and share.

But when the authentication mechanism is meaningless, backed by nothing but a post on a WordPress blog, you very dangerously redefine what “authentic” means…


link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

Start Up: Facebook’s Russian fess-up, how IBM spun Watson, North Korea in perspective, and more

How long can HTC keep the Vive VR headset alive – or vice-versa? Photo by wuestenigel on Flickr.

A selection of 11 links for you. Facebook, Russians, that’s how it is sometimes. I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

Facebook says it sold political ads to Russian company during 2016 election • The Washington Post

Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman:


Representatives of Facebook told congressional investigators Wednesday that it has discovered it sold ads during the U.S. presidential election to a shadowy Russian company seeking to target voters, according to several people familiar with the company’s findings.

Facebook officials reported that they traced the ad sales, totaling $100,000, to a Russian “troll farm” with a history of pushing pro-Kremlin propaganda, these people said.

A small portion of the ads, which began in the summer of 2015, directly named Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton, the people said. Most of the ads focused on pumping politically divisive issues such as gun rights and immigration fears, as well as gay rights and racial discrimination.

The acknowledgment by Facebook comes as congressional investigators and special counsel Robert Mueller are probing Russian interference in the U.S. election, including allegations that the Kremlin may have coordinated with the Trump campaign…

…Even though the ad spending from Russia is tiny relative to overall campaign costs, the report from Facebook that a Russian firm was able to target political messages is likely to fuel pointed questions from investigators about whether the Russians received guidance from people in the United States — a question some Democrats have been asking for months.

“I get the fact that the Russian intel services could figure out how to manipulate and use the bots. Whether they could know how to target states and levels of voters that the Democrats weren’t even aware really raises some questions. I think that’s a worthwhile area of inquiry,” Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said during a May airing of the podcast Pod Save America. “How did they know to go to that level of detail in those kinds of jurisdictions?”


link to this extract

Facebook digital ads figures differ from census data: analyst • Reuters

David Ingram and Rama Venkat Raman:


Figures Facebook gives advertisers about its potential reach differ from US census data, an investment analyst said on Tuesday, renewing questions about how tech companies verify the value of their digital marketing space.

Facebook, Alphabet Inc’s Google and other internet companies have faced persistent scrutiny from advertisers about how many people watch ads online and how to measure their views.

Facebook’s ad-buying website tells advertisers that the world’s largest social network has a potential reach of 41 million 18 to 24 year olds in the United States, whereas US census data shows that last year there were 31 million people living in the country between these ages, Brian Wieser, a Pivotal Research Group senior analyst, said in a note.

The gap persists for 25 to 34 year olds and is not widely known among ad agency executives, Wieser wrote in the client note, adding that the gap may cause large advertisers to step up demands for third-party measurement services.


It is possible that people are lying fabulously about their age to Facebook. But 10 million of them? This is embarrassing for Facebook.
link to this extract

IBM pitched Watson as a revolution in cancer care. It’s nowhere close • Stat News

Casey Ross and Ike Swetlitz:


contrary to IBM’s depiction of Watson as a digital prodigy, the supercomputer’s abilities are limited.

Perhaps the most stunning overreach is in the company’s claim that Watson for Oncology, through artificial intelligence, can sift through reams of data to generate new insights and identify, as an IBM sales rep put it, “even new approaches” to cancer care. STAT found that the system doesn’t create new knowledge and is artificially intelligent only in the most rudimentary sense of the term.

While Watson became a household name by winning the TV game show “Jeopardy!”, its programming is akin to a different game-playing machine: the Mechanical Turk, a chess-playing robot of the 1700s, which dazzled audiences but hid a secret — a human operator shielded inside.

In the case of Watson for Oncology, those human operators are a couple dozen physicians at a single, though highly respected, U.S. hospital: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Doctors there are empowered to input their own recommendations into Watson, even when the evidence supporting those recommendations is thin.

The actual capabilities of Watson for Oncology are not well-understood by the public, and even by some of the hospitals that use it. It’s taken nearly six years of painstaking work by data engineers and doctors to train Watson in just seven types of cancer, and keep the system updated with the latest knowledge.

“It’s been a struggle to update, I’ll be honest,” said Dr. Mark Kris, Memorial Sloan Kettering’s lead Watson trainer. He noted that treatment guidelines for every metastatic lung cancer patient worldwide recently changed in the course of one week after a research presentation at a cancer conference. “Changing the system of cognitive computing doesn’t turn around on a dime like that,” he said. “You have to put in the literature, you have to put in cases.”


Stat News does a great in-depth report.
link to this extract

Worldwide shipments of AR/VR headsets maintain solid growth trajectory in the second quarter • IDC


The worldwide market for Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) headsets grew 25.5% year over year in the second quarter of 2017 (2Q17) as shipments reached 2.1 million, according to the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Augmented and Virtual Reality Headset Tracker. Volumes declined slightly from the prior quarter, but recent price cuts on existing products and announced plans for new products are expected to lay the groundwork for a successful holiday season.

“Growth in the VR market has been rather sluggish compared to other recently introduced technologies as the amount of investment and, more importantly, the need for end user education is extremely high for VR,” said Jitesh Ubrani senior research analyst for IDC’s Mobile Device Trackers. “Though the recent price cuts across all major platforms will help alleviate one of the barriers to adoption, providing consumers the opportunity to learn about products and try before they buy is still a significant hurdle faced by most companies.”

Virtual reality products once again made up more than 98% of shipments in the combined AR/VR market. On the VR side, screenless viewers accounted for over half of all the headset shipments during the quarter. Tethered VR headsets captured 43%, up from the 34% in the previous quarter, driven in large part to Sony’s ongoing success with the PlayStation VR and Oculus increasing shipment volumes thanks to price cuts.


Of note: IDC reckons HTC was 5th largest, shipped 94,500 units, for a share of 4.4%. Its headset is pricier than rivals. In August, its revenues plummeted by 50% year-on-year to a 13-year monthly low. I don’t think HTC is long for this world, at least as an independent entity.
link to this extract

North Korea: why the West freaks out but South Korea doesn’t • Lowy Institute

Robert Kelly, who is an American professor in South Korea:


This current [South Korean] president, Moon Jae In, wanted to emphasise domestic issues such as corruption and social welfare, which elected him. Instead, North Korea has consumed his first four months in office.

By contrast, Americans seem to rediscover the North Korean threat whenever it pops up. US attention toward Asia is mixed at best. Elites care, but I doubt most regular Americans care much about the ‘pivot to Asia’ or North Korea, especially compared to the war on terror and the ‘clash of civilizations’ cultural anxieties it activates.

The upshot is that whenever North Korean bad behaviour spikes enough to make it international news, Americans suddenly pay attention. But in the interim, the South Koreans have also been paying attention. So they appear sanguine when Western journalists suddenly show up at those peaks.

Americans are curiously alarmist about their ‘thick security’. This is a point Stephen Walt has helpfully made again and again at his Foreign Policy blog. The United States is remarkably safe. Ensconced between two oceans and two weak neighbours and far from the tightly-packed Eurasian cauldron of competition, the US is one of the most secure great powers in history. Yet we Americans are prone to extraordinary outbursts of national security panic, most recently on display after 9/11. In response to approximately 3,000 fatalities, the US has killed orders of magnitude more people than that in so many wars in the Middle East that analysts now use terms like ‘forever war’ to describe our engagement there. Neoconservatism as a foreign policy posture is based on the notion that American security is constantly threatened, even in weak, far-away places like Yemen or Venezuela.

North Korea activates these impulses more than most rogues. America depicts North Korea in outlandish terms – video games and movies repeatedly depict North Korea invading the US, acquiring super-weapons, or otherwise as crazy. In my media experience, this has sunk in. I am regularly asked if the Kims are crazy, insane, war-mongers, and so on. They are not. They are just gangsters, not suicidal ideologues.

My own sense is that #2 is probably more causal. We are prone to threat-inflation, and North Korea is so easy to caricature.


Kelly is the man made famous by his children busting in when he was giving a TV interview. But he lives there and knows what’s going on. The US is going batshit over Kim Jong-Un for no sensible reason at all.

Note well his observation: “Neoconservatism as a foreign policy posture is based on the notion that American security is constantly threatened, even in weak, far-away places like Yemen or Venezuela.” Very insightful.
link to this extract

Apple’s refusal to approve India’s anti-spam app angers regulators • Bloomberg

Saritha Rai:


The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has been trying unsuccessfully to get its Do Not Disturb software included in the App Store. The program lets people share spam call and text message logs with the agency, which uses the data to alert mobile operators to block the spammers. Apple has said the app violates its privacy policy, according to the regulator.

The standoff could impact Apple’s efforts to expand in India, where half a billion smartphones will be sold by 2020. The Cupertino, California-based company has been in discussions with India’s government to open retail stores and secure permission to sell used iPhones imported into the country. Apple has put forth a long list of demands, including tax breaks and other concessions, to set up manufacturing facilities. 

“Nobody’s asking Apple to violate its privacy policy,” said Ram Sewak Sharma, chairman of the Delhi-based telecom regulator. “It is a ridiculous situation, no company can be allowed to be the guardian of a user’s data.”

The regulator is currently seeking public and stakeholder comments on a consultative paper on users’ control over their personal information and rules on the flow of data through telecommunications networks. The process, scheduled to be completed in September, could eventually lead to new rules governing user data. That could also become part of the telecom licensing process, Sharma said.

Any new measures could affect not just Apple, but Facebook, Google and other technology companies that handle large amounts of private and personal information.


link to this extract

Russians have hacked dozens of US energy companies, researchers say • Buzzfeed

Kevin Collier:


A hacker group linked to the Russian government has acquired an unprecedented level of access to companies that supply power to the US power grid, a cybersecurity firm says.

Symantec, a California-based firm that provides cybersecurity services and worldwide research against online threats, says the group, which it’s nicknamed Dragonfly 2.0, may have compromised more than a dozen American companies in recent months.

Dragonfly – also called Crouching Yeti, or Energetic Bear, depending on which researcher you talk to – was an established hacker group that attacked energy sector targets around the world from at least 2011 until 2014, when it went quiet after its tactics were exposed by public research. Researchers at Symantec have declined to specifically cite Russia as the culprit, though they do say it’s a state-sponsored attack. Researchers at other firms, like CrowdStrike and FireEye, have tied Dragonfly to the Russian government.

“This is the first time we’ve seen this scale, this aggressiveness, and this level of penetration in the US, for sure,” Eric Chien, technical director of Symantec’s Security Technology & Response Division, told BuzzFeed News.

“What we’re seeing is them getting into dozens, as far as we know, likely more, of organizations who are basically energy companies. We’re talking about organizations who are supplying power to the power grid,” Chien said.


Not “on-off” capability, but concerning even so.
link to this extract

Xiaomi partners with Google for Mi A1 smartphone, targeting developing markets • Forbes

Yue Wang:


Over the past three years, Xiaomi has entered as many as 40 countries across regions, selling its phones and smart devices at cost to compete with brands like Apple and Samsung as well as China’s own Huawei, OPPO and Vivo for the attention of users in countries like India and Russia. The pace of expansion accelerated dramatically this year, with Xiaomi breaking into a dozen countries including Greece, Indonesia, Paraguay and Poland for the very first time, confirmed the company’s Senior Vice President Wang Xiang in a recent interview with Forbes.

In addition to partnering with online marketplaces and physical distributors in new markets, Xiaomi is also linking arms with Google’s parent company, Alphabet, to beef up its appeal. The company announced on Tuesday its $230 Mi A1 smartphone that will run on Google’s Android One operating platform, which will be the first Xiaomi device that doesn’t use the company’s default MIUI system. The handset, initially available in 40 markets including India, Indonesia, Russia and Mexico, is aimed at attracting users who are more familiar with Google-provided services, according to Wang. He also said that Xiaomi and Google have agreed to share revenues, but declined to provide more details. The Mi A1 will be available for purchase on September 12.


Android One is back – except only with Xiaomi, seems like. Perhaps more will follow. But it doesn’t seem like a great plan to do revenue-sharing with Google, unless it’s on Play Store purchases and so on. China isn’t panning out as the stronghold Xiaomi thought it would be (OPPO and vivo are eating that up).
link to this extract

Isle of Man firm to launch 250 million-pound Dubai property priced in bitcoin • Reuters

Gertrude Chavez-Dreyfuss:


The Knox Group of Companies, with headquarters in the Isle of Man, announced late on Tuesday it will launch a residential and commercial property development in Dubai valued at £250m ($325m), with residences that can be purchased in the digital currency bitcoin.

The company said the 2.4m-square-foot (22.3-hectare) property venture called Aston Plaza and Residences, consisting of two residential towers and a shopping mall, will be the first major real estate development that will accept bitcoin as payment.

The Dubai project is one step toward efforts to push bitcoin into the mainstream. Maligned and ridiculed in its early days, bitcoin hit a record high of $4,870 on Friday, surging more than 400% so far this year.

The whole project is expected to be completed by late 2019.

“This a great opportunity for the crypto-currency community to offload some of its significant gains, especially the early adopters, and actually deploy them in hard-core assets which I‘m building,” Knox’s chairman, Doug Barrowman, said in an interview with Reuters.


I think Barrowman is actually playing a different game: he’s wagering that if people buy now in bitcoin, he holds onto the payment, and bitcoin appreciates against the dollar, so he wins twice over.

Now we’re hoping for bitcoin to plummet, aren’t we?
link to this extract

Huawei surpasses Apple to be summer’s second largest smartphone brand • Counterpoint Research


According to the latest research from Counterpoint’s Market Pulse for July 2017, Huawei has surpassed Apple in global smartphone sales consistently for June and July. With August sales looking strong for the Chinese vendor, a hat-trick for Huawei could be on the cards.

Discussing this key competitive development, Counterpoint’s Research Director Peter Richardson, notes, “This is a significant milestone for Huawei, the largest Chinese smartphone brand with a growing global presence. It speaks volumes for this primarily network infrastructure vendor on how far it has grown in the consumer mobile handset space in the last three to four years. The global scale Huawei has been able to achieve can be attributed to its consistent investment in R&D and manufacturing, coupled with aggressive marketing and sales channel expansion.”

Mr. Richardson adds, “While this streak could be temporary considering the annual iPhone refresh is just around the corner, it nevertheless underscores the rate at which Huawei has been growing. However, a weak presence in the South Asian, Indian and North American markets limits Huawei’s potential in the near-to mid-term to take a sustainable second place position behind Samsung.”


The official calendar quarters run from July to September, and Apple’s sales always dip in the summer months (when overall global sales are also lower), so there’s a little bit of cherry-picking here. But the point about Huawei’s size is fair. What we don’t know is whether it’s making any money at it. And in the end, that’s the point of being in business.
link to this extract

Facebook offers hundreds of millions of dollars for music rights • Bloomberg

Lucas Shaw and Sarah Frier:


Facebook is offering major record labels and music publishers hundreds of millions of dollars so the users of its social network can legally include songs in videos they upload, according to people familiar with the matter.

The posting and viewing of video on Facebook has exploded in recent years, and many of the videos feature music to which Facebook doesn’t have the rights. Under current law, rights holders must ask Facebook to take down videos with infringing material.

Music owners have been negotiating with Facebook for months in search of a solution, and Facebook has promised to build a system to identify and tag music that infringes copyrights. Yet such a setup will take as long as two years to complete, which is too long for both sides to wait, said the people, who asked not to be named discussing details that aren’t public.

Facebook is eager to make a deal now so that it no longer frustrates users, by taking down their videos; partners, by hosting infringing material; or advertisers, with the prospect of legal headaches.


So it’s talking about building something just like ContentID, the system YouTube uses for identifying music. (Doesn’t it already exist, in Shazam’s system? Though it has to identify in noisy environments too.) This might be a way for the music business to play Facebook and YouTube off against each other, trying to ratchet up payments particularly from the latter – which music companies have always said are too low (because they’re monetised through ads).
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

Start Up: Tinder’s GINI number, the fake war photographer, Oreo reviewed, ARCore v ARKit, and more

Lenovo has paid a fine to settle charges over preinstalled software which could spy on users. Photo by keso on Flickr.

A selection of 11 links for you. Energise. I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

Tinder Experiments II: Guys, unless you are really hot you are probably better off not • Medium



This study was conducted to quantify the Tinder socio-economic prospects for males based on the percentage of females that will “like” them. Female Tinder usage data was collected and statistically analyzed to determine the inequality in the Tinder economy. It was determined that the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men. The Gini coefficient for the Tinder economy based on “like” percentages was calculated to be 0.58. This means that the Tinder economy has more inequality than 95.1% of all the world’s national economies. In addition, it was determined that a man of average attractiveness would be “liked” by approximately 0.87% (1 in 115) of women on Tinder…

…The Tinder economy has a higher Gini [inequality] coefficient than 95.1% of the countries in the world. The only countries that have a higher Gini coefficient than Tinder are Angola, Haiti, Botswana, Namibia, Comoros, South Africa, Equatorial Guinea, and Seychelles (which I had never heard of before).


And yet..
link to this extract

Lenovo settles FTC charges it harmed consumers with preinstalled software on its laptops • Federal Trade Commission


Lenovo Inc., one of the world’s largest computer manufacturers, has agreed to settle charges by the Federal Trade Commission and 32 State Attorneys General that the company harmed consumers by pre-loading software on some laptops that compromised security protections in order to deliver ads to consumers.

In its complaint, the FTC charged that beginning in August 2014 Lenovo began selling consumer laptops in the United States that came with a preinstalled “man-in-the-middle” software program called VisualDiscovery that interfered with how a user’s browser interacted with websites and created serious security vulnerabilities.

“Lenovo compromised consumers’ privacy when it preloaded software that could access consumers’ sensitive information without adequate notice or consent to its use,” said Acting FTC Chairman Maureen K. Ohlhausen. “This conduct is even more serious because the software compromised online security protections that consumers rely on.”

VisualDiscovery software, developed by a company called Superfish, Inc., was installed on hundreds of thousands of Lenovo laptops. It delivered pop-up ads from the company’s retail partners whenever a user’s cursor hovered over a similar looking product on a website.

To deliver its ads, VisualDiscovery acted as a “man-in-the-middle” between consumers’ browsers and the websites they visited, even those websites that were encrypted. Without the consumer’s knowledge or consent, this “man-in-the-middle” technique allowed VisualDiscovery to access all of a consumer’s sensitive personal information transmitted over the Internet, including login credentials, Social Security numbers, medical information, and financial and payment information.


Lenovo isn’t just “one of the world’s largest computer manufacturers”; at the time it was the biggest, and it’s still second-biggest. This was just crap.

Also, where’s the settlement and fine with the UK’s or EU’s regulator?
link to this extract

Fake war photographer gets exposed after fooling the world • Petapixel

Jan Nicolas:


if it weren’t for some mistakes by Martins and an attentive BBC journalist named Natasha Ribeiro, Martins’ amazing life and photography career would likely still be enjoying its meteoric rise. But Ribeiro became suspicious of Martins after learning about his life and work, and she became even more suspicious when she dug deeper and couldn’t find a single person who had ever met him.

Not a single Brazilian journalist in Iraq, where Martins had supposedly been covering extensively. Not any of the authorities who would have had dealings with Martins. Not any members of the NGOs he said he was a part of.

Martins had given a story and photos to VICE about the battle in Peshmerga, but two other Brazilian correspondents who were there at the same time said they had never met this newly famous photographer — something that is nearly impossible given how tight-knit the community of conflict journalists is.

Martins had told BBC Brazil through a WhatsApp chat that he was working for the United Nations, saying: “I am a humanitarian (volunteer) in the United Nations field and I work in the organization of refugee camps.” But an investigation revealed that there was no record of Martins having ever worked for the UN Refugee Agency, which the organization’s press chief, Adrian Edwards, confirmed to the BBC.

The investigation into Martins soon revealed other oddities, BBC Brazil reports. Martins had developed relationships with at least 6 young, beautiful, and successful women through social networks, and then used each one to relay information to journalists. BBC Brazil found that none of the girlfriends had ever met Martins in real life.


Ribiero’s report is only on the Portuguese-language section of the site; I couldn’t find her name on the English version. But the photos were taken by a real photographer – Daniel Britt. “Martins” flipped them left-for-right to offer as his own. (Something new that TinEye and anti-plagiarism system need to be aware of.)
link to this extract

Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed • Ars Technica

Ron Amadeo has been inside ur android for years now; here’s his review of an OS whose layers will be coming to people some time in the next, oh, a few years. These are just the headings; it’s too big (20,000 words) to excerpt. (Though if you want to jump to the “Good, Bad, Ugly” wrapup, it’s here.)

Remember when desktop operating systems used to merit long piece-by-piece reviews?


So, coming soon to your phone, your tablet, your watch, your TV, your car, your “things,” and your VR headset—it’s Android 8.0 Oreo. Let’s dive in.

Table of Contents

Project Treble—Finally, real progress on the fragmentation problem
HAL versioning and deprecation
Working with SoC vendors
A ROM revolution
Isolating the media stack
Android’s biggest re-architecture, ever
Notifications—Android’s best feature gets better
The new layout—and its awesome “By the Way” section
The new colors and media notifications
Snoozing notifications
Notification Channels: Great for apps that have it, terrible for apps that don’t
Icon badges and shortcuts
The new ambient notification display
The Great Background Processing Lockdown
Mandatory JobScheduler
RIP Implicit Broadcasts
No more wakelocks, no silent background services
(Somewhat) gracefully declining on older OSes
Limiting scans for location and Wi-Fi
A real API for floating apps
Google Play Protect—Google says “please don’t install antivirus apps”
Sideloading changes
Security grab bag
Emoji: New glyphs and an all-new design
EmojiCompat and Downloadable fonts—updating emojis without a system update
System UI improvements
Adaptive icons—Shape shifting, animated icons
A new widget picker
Picture-in-Picture for phones and tablets
Smart text selection and TensorFlow Lite
Settings—A new theme, a new layout
Streaming OS Updates—never fail an update due to storage space again
Rescue Party
Android Go—Scaling Android for the next billion users
The OS in “Go” mode
Google Play Services gets chopped up
Apps get special “Go” versions and features
Color management
Physics-based animation and the new Easter Egg
The new “SDCardFS” file system wrapper
Grab Bag
“Foundational” improvements address updates, security, speed, and battery life
The Good
The Bad
The Ugly


link to this extract

How is ARCore better than ARKit? • Super Ventures Blog on Medium

Matt Miesnieks on Google’s augmented reality software kit v Apple’s:


One developer I spoke to jokingly said “I just looked at the ARCore SDK and they’ve literally renamed the Tango sdk, commented out the depth camera code and changed a compiler flag”. I suspect it’s a bit more than that, but not much more (this isn’t a bad thing!).


Tango (that money pit for Lenovo and Asus) had been in development for two years inside Google; Apple caught up by buying small AR companies. This is the part where he talks about a key element:


the real benefits of calibration become visible at the outer limits of the system performance (by definition). Both ARKit and ARCore can both track quite well for many meters before the user notices any drift. I haven’t seen any head-to-head tests done over long times/distances, but it doesn’t really matter. Developers are still getting their heads around putting AR content immediately in front of you. Users can barely comprehend that they can freely walk around quite large distances (and there’s no content to see there anyway). So in terms of how AR applications are really being used, any differences in calibration are pretty much impossible to detect. By the time developers are pushing the boundaries of the SDKs, Google is betting there will be a new generation of devices on the market with far more tightly integrated sensor calibration done at the factory.

For example I spoke to one of the largest IMU [inertial measurement unit] OEMs this week about this topic and he said that their mobile phone IMUs are only factory calibrated to a single operating temperature, in order to reduce costs. This means that the IMU hardware is tuned so it gives the fewest errors at this one temperature. As you continue to use the phone it gets hotter & this will cause the IMU to behave slightly differently than it’s calibrated for, and errors will result. This is fine for most IMU use cases (rotate from portrait to landscape mode for instance), but for VIO once the device heats up, the IMU measurements for dead-reckoning calculations become unreliable and the tracking drifts. This OEM can easily start calibrating for multiple temperature ranges if they are asked (and they will be!), meaning that’s one less source of error that Google’s ARCore VIO code has to eliminate device-type by device-type. Apple, being vertically integrated could address these challenges much faster, while Android needs to wait for the changes to filter through an ecosystem.


link to this extract

A serf on Google’s farm • Talking Points Memo

Josh Marshall runs the politics website, and has observed Google’s growing monopoly over everything that he and other publishers do online, from ads to email to documents to search to traffic:


What we’ve experienced is a little different. Google is so big and so powerful that even when it’s trying to do something good, it can be dangerous and frightening.

Here’s an example.

With the events of recent months and years, Google is apparently now trying to weed out publishers that are using its money streams and architecture to publish hate speech. Certainly you’d probably be unhappy to hear that Stormfront was funded by ads run through Google. I’m not saying that’s happening. I’m just giving you a sense of what they are apparently trying to combat. Over the last several months we’ve gotten a few notifications from Google telling us that certain pages of ours were penalized for ‘violations’ of their ban for hate speech. When we looked at the pages they were talking about they were articles about white supremacist incidents. Most were tied to Dylann Roof’s mass murder in Charleston.

Now in practice all this meant was that two or three old stories about Dylann Roof could no longer run ads purchased through Google. I’d say it’s unlikely that loss to TPM amounted to even a cent a month. Totally meaningless. But here’s the catch. The way these warnings work and the way these particular warnings were worded, you get penalized enough times and then you’re blacklisted.

Now, certainly you’re figuring we could contact someone at Google and explain that we’re not publishing hate speech and racist violence. We’re reporting on it. Not really. We tried that. We got back a message from our rep not really understanding the distinction and cheerily telling us to try to operate within the no hate speech rules. And how many warnings until we’re blacklisted? Who knows?

If we were cut off, would that be Adexchange (the ads) or DoubleClick for Publishers (the road) or both? Who knows?

…Google is so powerful and so all-encompassing that it can actually do great damage unintentionally. As a general matter, I’d say our worst experiences with Google – and to be fair, none have been that bad – have been cases like these where Google is so big and its customers and products (people are products) are so distant from its concerns that we’ve gotten caught up in or whiplashed by rules or systems that simply don’t make any sense or are affirmatively absurd in how they affect us. One thing I’ve observed with Google over the years is that it is institutionally so used to its ‘customers’ actually being its products that when it gets into businesses where it actually has customers it really has little sense of how to deal with them…

…When I discussed a few of these issues on Twitter a couple days ago, some people said: Well, the publishers brought it on themselves. They went for the cheap clicks or gaming Facebook’s or Google’s algorithms. So they brought it on themselves.

This is true to an extent but I think misses the point. It’s not about anyone’s individual morality. Not the publishers or the platform monopolies. It’s a structural issue. Monopolies are bad for the economy and they’re bad politically. They also have perverse consequences across the board. The money that used to fund your favorite website is now going to Google and Facebook, which doesn’t produce any news at all.


He offers another example to do with email which is almost comical – except it’s so potentially disastrous. The strange thing is that Google is becoming so dominant people are either thinking “oh well” or “we must do everything possible not to be in this position”. Most are in the former group.
link to this extract

Google: time to return to not being evil • Vivaldi Browser

Jon von Tetzchner has known Google since its earliest days, having been the first to incorporate its search (in the Opera browser):


Our cooperation with Google was a good one. Integrating their search into Opera helped us deliver a better service to our users and generated revenue that paid the bills. We helped Google grow, along with others that followed in our footsteps and integrated Google search into their browsers.

However, then things changed. Google increased their proximity with the Mozilla foundation. They also introduced new services such as Google Docs. These services were great, gained quick popularity, but also exposed the darker side of Google. Not only were these services made to be incompatible with Opera, but also encouraged users to switch their browsers. I brought this up with Sergey Brin, in vain. For millions of Opera users to be able to access these services, we had to hide our browser’s identity. The browser sniffing situation only worsened after Google started building their own browser, Chrome.

Now, we are making the Vivaldi browser. It is based on Chromium, an open-source project, led by Google and built on WebKit and KHTML. Using Google’s services should not call for any issues, but sadly, the reality is different. We still have to hide our identity when visiting services such as Google Docs.

And now things have hit a new low.


The low? Vivaldi’s AdWords account was suspended, for no clear explanation. Live by the AdWord, die by the AdWord.
link to this extract

Samsung is ‘a ship without a captain,’ says co-CEO • CNET


[Samsung group leader Jay Y.] Lee’s imprisonment has [Samsung Electronics chief] Yoon [Boo-Keun] stressed, he told Süddeutsche Zeitung. He added that as head of the consumer electronics business, he takes a near-term view for products while it’s Lee’s responsibility as vice chairman to map the long-term strategy. But Yoon now has to think longer term, the newspaper reported.

Yoon also told Süddeutsche Zeitung that the Internet of Things hasn’t taken off as quickly as hoped because there aren’t clear and compelling consumer use cases, and privacy and security are also considerations. Still, Samsung plans for all of its products to be internet-connected by 2020.

Samsung’s newest focus for the Internet of Things is embedding its Bixby voice assistant into its various connected appliances and televisions. The “smart sidekick” debuted on the Galaxy S8 and S8 Plus earlier this year and will also be available on the Note 8 when it hits the market.

Bixby acts as a new interface to control your phone, but it will be different for Samsung’s appliances and televisions, Yoon told Süddeutsche Zeitung. For Samsung’s connected refrigerators, Bixby will be able to recommend recipes based on what you have in your kitchen, the newspaper said. For TVs, it would learn what shows you normally watch and automatically play them when you turn on the television.

“Integration is already in full swing,” Yoon said, according to Süddeutsche Zeitung.


Also interesting: not using OLED in TVs because of “some long-term problems with colour and burn-in”. Which implies something about using OLED phones for longer than a few years – TVs tend to last five years or more.
link to this extract

Trump’s South Korea trade talk is just that • Bloomberg Gadfly

Shelly Banjo:


even without North Korea’s recent escalation, it seems unlikely America will totally quash the 2012 trade pact, known as KORUS.

America is South Korea’s second-largest trading partner after China, while South Korea holds a spot much farther down the US list. But America doesn’t actually have the capability or know-how to manufacture a whole lot of everyday things it needs, such as cell phones and computers.

So even though South Korea represents the US’s seventh-largest trading partner, the North Asian nation sells a lot more than it buys: America’s goods trade gap with South Korea was $27.7bn in 2016, more than double the $11.9bn deficit in 2007.

That means even if Trump wanted to rip up KORUS, there’s little chance the river of stuff flowing into the US would stop. Rather, dissolving the pact would drive up consumer prices of smartphones and SUVs.

From a corporate perspective, fewer than 1% of South Korean companies depend on America for a meaningful amount of sales. Out of 2,750 publicly traded businesses, just 66 get more than a fifth of their revenue from the Americas, according to an analysis of data compiled by Bloomberg. 


Samsung would be affected; the US is its biggest market. But there’s just no way this is going to happen. The timing is terrible, and the idea is stupid.
link to this extract

What do US wireless operators want in the next iPhone? • BTIG Research

Walter Piecyk:


We estimate that iPhones represent nearly half of all smartphones in the United States. Wireless operators and investors are therefore very interested in what technologies and spectrum bands are included each year as they can determine whether these companies are able to leverage their network and spectrum investments. Adding spectrum to a network doesn’t do much good if the smartphones don’t take advantage of it. Unfortunately, the operators don’t really know for sure what is included in each iPhone prior to its launch. So, here’s a quick review of what each national wireless operator in the United States would like included this year.


This is pretty technical, but would be useful to anyone who’s really into phone/network interaction.
link to this extract

Landmark Intel judgment critical for other EU antitrust cases • Reuters

Foo Yun Chee:


Europe’s top court will rule on Wednesday whether US chipmaker Intel offered illegal rebates to squeeze out rivals in a judgment that could affect EU antitrust regulators’ cases against Qualcomm and Alphabet’s Google.

The ruling by the Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) could also provide more clarity on whether rebates are anti-competitive by nature or whether enforcers need to prove the anti-competitive effect.

The European Commission in a 2009 decision said that Intel tried to thwart rival Advanced Micro Devices by giving rebates to PC makers Dell, Hewlett Packard, NEC and Lenovo for buying most of their computer chips from the company.

It handed down a €1.06bn ($1.3bn) fine, a record that was subsequently eclipsed by the €2.4bn fine levied on Google in June this year.

A lower court upheld the EU competition authority’s decision in 2014, but last year an ECJ court adviser backed Intel’s arguments.

An adverse ruling for the Commission on Wednesday could result in a radical review of ongoing cases, said Andrew Ward, a partner at Madrid-based law firm Cuatrecasas.


Hard to see how a rebate isn’t, in effect, a price cut or subsidy. This isn’t like consumer rebates, where the expectation is that only a small percentage will actually take advantage of them because of the tedium of the rebate process.
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

Web readers! You can now sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam.

Start Up: Myanmar’s fake news problem, Paris Hilton coins it, it’s Facebook’s web!, iOS cropping, and more

Your happiness with an app is often inversely related to the length of time you spend using it. Photo by CommScope on Flickr.

A selection of 13 links for you. Your mum did warn you. I’m @charlesarthur on Twitter. Observations and links welcome.

Myanmar conflict: Fake photos inflame tension • BBC News

Jonathan Head is the BBC’s South East Asia correspondent:


A recent surge in violence in the northern part of Myanmar’s Rakhine state has been accompanied by a slew of misleading images being shared on social media.

Photos and video purporting to be from the conflict have been circulated widely. Much of it is gruesome and inflammatory, and much of it is wrong.

Deep-seated mistrust and rivalry between Rohingya Muslims and the majority Buddhist population in Rakhine have led to deadly communal violence in the past. The Rohingya have faced decades of persecution in Myanmar where they are denied citizenship.

(Warning: This article contains images some people may find upsetting.)

Information is very sketchy and journalists have very limited access to this region. Even those who have managed to reach the area have found that the volatile situation and intense hostility towards the Rohingyas makes it very difficult to gather information.


Myanmar, remember, is a country which has gone from 10% mobile phone penetration at the end of 2013 among its 60 million population to 50% by mid-2015 to 80%; over 60% total have smartphones.

And guess what: fake news and radical hate groups have taken full advantage of that, in a country which has gone from barely any broad sharing of news to the uncontrolled form. (The linked article is from May 2017.)
link to this extract

App ratings • Time Well Spent


On average, comparing between “Happy” and “Unhappy” amounts of usage of the same apps, their unhappy amount of time is 2.4x the amount of happy time.

😊 22 mins per day on Facebook vs. ☹️ 59 mins.
😊 12 mins per day on CandyCrush instead of ☹️ 47 mins.
😊 29 mins per day on Reddit instead of ☹️ 57 mins.
😊 26 mins per day on Instagram instead of ☹️ 54 mins.


Data collected from a pool of 200,000 iPhone users – so this feels representative. It’s part of a project by Time Well Spent which is ” trying to bring attention to how big tech companies are designing their apps to capture as much of your attention as possible. Our goals with using these apps are not the same as their business goals.”

That graph showing how unhappy users spend more time in apps is dramatic.
link to this extract

Even an Apple store can’t prevent the death of a US mall • Quartz

Mike Murphy:


The American mall is dying, and not even Apple can save it.

While more brick-and-mortar stores are projected to close this year than during the 2008 recession, Apple remains the world’s most profitable retailer; according to market research, it generates $5,546 per square foot of retail space. Apple’s stores are so effective at bringing in foot traffic that they can lift an entire mall’s sales by 10%.

But nothing rose gold can stay: Apple blog 9to5Mac noticed on Sept. 1 that Apple’s store in Simi Valley, California (just north of Los Angeles), is shutting down on Sept. 15. It is the first Apple store to permanently close in the US.

9to5Mac postulates that the mall the store is in, the Simi Valley Town Center, faces declining traffic, as many other stores there have also been shuttering. Earlier this year, Macy’s said it would be closing one of two stores it operates in the mall—one of the 65 locations it plans to close across the US in 2017.


There’s another Apple store about 10 miles from the one that’s closing. But how strange if Apple’s retail march should be stymied by the collapse of other retailers.
link to this extract

Instagram Says Hack That Targeted Celebrities Was Wider Than Previously Thought – WSJ

Deepa Seetharaman:


Social-media app Instagram said a hack it disclosed earlier this week affected a larger number of users than it previously detected.

Instagram, owned by Facebook, earlier this week said hackers stole email addresses and phone numbers—but not passwords—tied to some celebrity accounts.

On Friday, the photo- and video-sharing app said the theft affected regular users as well and wasn’t just “targeted at high-profile users.” Instagram reiterated that no passwords were stolen.

The contact information was stolen after hackers exploited a bug in Instagram’s software that the company says has since been patched up.

Instagram, which has 700 million monthly users, said it doesn’t know which specific accounts were affected and said a “low percentage” of its users were affected, without providing more specific figures.


Email addresses and phone numbers. That’s calamitous. The article says “it typically takes a lot of work to gain control of a user’s phone number or email account without the help of a stolen password”. Perhaps they’re unaware of SIM fraud, which is an easy way to get those. But for celebrities (or anyone), having someone else get your phone number in this way is bad.
link to this extract

iOS cropping • All this

Dr Drang:


I’m pretty sure I’ve always been frustrated by the way cropping works in the iOS Photos app. It’s usually presented as being so easy—just drag the crop handles where you want—but that isn’t really how it works. Quite often, a handle you aren’t dragging moves too, screwing up your careful editing…

…There is a way around this, but it’s also unintuitive, and I often forget about it until my crop is ruined and I have to start over again.

Instead of dragging the crop handles at the corners of the image, touch and drag from the middle of an edge. For God knows what reason, cropping this way doesn’t change the position of the other crop handles.


I wasn’t particularly aware of this as an annoyance, but it clearly bugs him a lot. (Also, I don’t think it will change.)
link to this extract

Flat UI elements attract less attention and cause uncertainty • Nielsen-Norman Group

The usability testers compared “flat” and “slightly 3D” pages:


When we compared average number of fixations and average amount of time people spent looking at each page, we found that:
• The average amount of time was significantly higher on the weak-signifier versions than the strong-signifier versions. On average participants spent 22% more time (i.e., slower task performance) looking at the pages with weak signifiers.
• The average number of fixations was significantly higher on the weak-signifier versions than the strong-signifier versions. On average, people had 25% more fixations on the pages with weak signifiers.
(Both findings were significant by a paired t-test with sites as the random factor, p less than 0.05.)

This means that, when looking at a design with weak signifiers, users spent more time looking at the page, and they had to look at more elements on the page. Since this experiment used targeted findability tasks, more time and effort spent looking around the page are not good. These findings don’t mean that users were more “engaged” with the pages. Instead, they suggest that participants struggled to locate the element they wanted, or weren’t confident when they first saw it.


Even so, people are going to go with flat design, because it’s trendy. For a couple of years. Then it’ll be 3D buttons everywhere.
link to this extract

Paris Hilton backs an eyebrow-raising crypto project • FT Alphaville

Kadhim Shubber:


What is LydianCoin? Oh boy, you’re going to enjoy this.

LydianCoin is from a company called Gravity4, whose chairman and chief executive, Gurbaksh Chahal, pleaded guilty in 2014 to misdemeanour battery charges of domestic violence.

The digital advertising business claims to be “the world’s first A.I. big data marketing cloud” and is raising $100m (!!!) through the sale of Lydian “tokens” to finance the development of… well, nothing really:


100% of the proceeds raised by the sale of Lydian tokens will be held by LydianCoin Pte. (in fiat currency or cryptocurrency, as financial, security, and other considerations may demand) as reserves against the cost of services to be performed for Lydian token holders upon negotiation of the token back to Lydian.


If the whitepaper is to be believed, the whole idea here is that people will pay for Lydian tokens and use them to buy advertising campaigns from LydianCoin, which in turn licences its technology, products and services from Gravity4. The money won’t be used for anything. It will just sit there, covering the enormous balance sheet liability this ICO will create for LydianCoin.

We’ve often talked about how ICOs are like buying funfair tickets for a funfair that hasn’t been built yet. This is like buying tokens for rides at a funfair when you could just use your money to pay for the rides directly.


I think this is going to flop, because of the action taken in the next link.
link to this extract

China herds ICO cats • Bloomberg Gadfly

Tim Culpan on the decision by China to regulate (essentially, stop) “initial coin offerings” – the profusion of new cryptocurrencies, which are blooming like algae in a fetid pond:


Chinese policy makers have allowed bitcoin to flourish almost unchecked. To be sure, regulators had shown their concern over the digital currency aiding capital flight and money laundering by curtailing withdrawals earlier this year. Yet their general hands-off approach allowed China to become a global center of trading and mining (the process by which transactions are verified).

Libertarians decry the limited controls China has put on bitcoin, while others have argued that regulation equals legitimacy. Those who think the government has been heavy-handed need to take a look at the country’s foreign-exchange and capital controls.

Banning ICOs means regulators are taking a much firmer stance on this fundraising method than they ever had on bitcoin. Offerings were getting so out of hand that it was becoming a cliche. I’ve written before on why these new tokens are like penny stocks (and that’s a good thing), so I won’t belabor the point. But whereas bitcoin is just one crytpocurrency propped up by a demand narrative, the majority of new tokens issued this year are of zero value. Let me be clear: It’s not that most of these new coins are of low value; most of them have no value whatsoever.

About 10% of all money raised in ethereum-based ICOs has been stolen by cybercriminals, according to a recent estimate by Chainalysis. By August, cybercrime losses had tallied $225m, the digital currency analysts wrote. And that doesn’t take into account all the money flowing into tokens that weren’t stolen, but simply funded scams or projects with no future.


The ICO bubble is just astonishing. I really find it hard to believe that people are so credulous. But clearly some are.
link to this extract

Russian election hacking efforts, wider than previously known, draw little scrutiny • The New York Times

Nicole Perlroth, Michael Wines And Matthew Rosenberg:


The calls started flooding in from hundreds of irate North Carolina voters just after 7 a.m. on Election Day last November.

Dozens were told they were ineligible to vote and were turned away at the polls, even when they displayed current registration cards. Others were sent from one polling place to another, only to be rejected. Scores of voters were incorrectly told they had cast ballots days earlier. In one precinct, voting halted for two hours.

Susan Greenhalgh, a troubleshooter at a nonpartisan election monitoring group, was alarmed. Most of the complaints came from Durham, a blue [Democrat]-leaning county in a swing state. The problems involved electronic poll books — tablets and laptops, loaded with check-in software, that have increasingly replaced the thick binders of paper used to verify voters’ identities and registration status. She knew that the company that provided Durham’s software, VR Systems, had been penetrated by Russian hackers months before.

“It felt like tampering, or some kind of cyberattack,” Ms. Greenhalgh said about the voting troubles in Durham.

There are plenty of other reasons for such breakdowns — local officials blamed human error and software malfunctions — and no clear-cut evidence of digital sabotage has emerged, much less a Russian role in it. Despite the disruptions, a record number of votes were cast in Durham, following a pattern there of overwhelming support for Democratic presidential candidates, this time Hillary Clinton.

But months later, for Ms. Greenhalgh, other election security experts and some state officials, questions still linger about what happened that day in Durham as well as other counties in North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia and Arizona.


link to this extract

SharknAT&To • Nomotion Blog

J. Hutchins dug into the AT&T cable modem, as provided to millions of customers, and found tons of awful security holes:


It was found that the latest firmware update (9.2.2h0d83) for the NVG589 and NVG599 modems enabled SSH and contained hardcoded credentials which can be used to gain access to the modem’s “cshell” client over SSH. The cshell is a limited menu driven shell which is capable of viewing/changing the WiFi SSID/password, modifying the network setup, re-flashing the firmware from a file served by any tftp server on the Internet, and even controlling what appears to be a kernel module whose sole purpose seems to be to inject advertisements into the user’s unencrypted web traffic. Although no clear evidence was found suggesting that this module is actually being used currently, it is present, and vulnerable.


In other words, the superuser account has a hardcoded password. And it could insert ads into your internet browsing. Delightful.
link to this extract

Why 16% of the code on the average site belongs to Facebook, and what that means • Medium

Ben Regenspan:


According to data collected by, 6% of the top 10,000 most high-traffic sites load content from Facebook’s servers. For the vast majority of them, that content is likely Facebook’s Javascript SDK, a huge block of code that is needed to display such features as the Like button (as seen on many media sites) and Facebook comments widgets (also used on many big media sites, Buzzfeed among them). The SDK code is so big that it represents about 16% of the total size of all Javascript on the average web page.

One of the culprits behind modern websites taking so long to download
As a sizable and widely-used software library, the Facebook SDK is a nice way of illustrating some of the answers to the questions: just why is the average site today so big? And how much does size actually matter?

…If you want to use the Like button, stop and reconsider. Facebook no longer displays Likes of a page prominently (or, in most cases, at all) on user timelines. It’s better to use a simple custom Share button or link, and as a side benefit, doing so will prevent Facebook from tracking all visits to your page and interfering with the privacy of your users. Sites that have eliminated the Like button have failed to identify any negative impact of doing so when it comes to Facebook traffic referrals.


link to this extract

Donald Trump’s EPA is now attacking journalists [updated] • Gizmodo

Tom McKay:


On Saturday, Associated Press journalists Jason Dearen and Michael Biesecker reported at least five toxic, Houston-area Superfund sites in the path of Hurricane Harvey had been deluged with floodwater, potentially distributing the assorted nasty things contained within across a much larger geographical area. The AP report noted while its reporters were able to access the sites via boat, the Environmental Protection Agency was not on scene, and did not provide a timeline for when its staff would be able to visit them.

Now the EPA, which is under the control of Donald Trump appointee and longtime EPA hater Scott Pruitt, has fired back with one of the administration’s favorite tactics: smearing the messenger. In an extraordinary statement that appeared on the agency’s website on Sunday, the EPA called the AP report “misleading” and attacked Biesecker’s “audacity” and credibility.

“Here’s the truth: through aerial imaging, EPA has already conducted initial assessments at 41 Superfund sites—28 of those sites show no damage, and 13 have experienced flooding,” the EPA wrote.

Notably, the EPA tried to bury that its “initial assessment” was conducted with “aerial images,” not actual on-site assessments, and that the agency had failed to visit at least 11 possibly storm-damaged Superfund sites as of Saturday. That is completely in line with the original AP report.


The EPA tried to raise the stakes by claiming that Biesecker “has a history of not letting the facts get in the way of his story”. This is untrue; the EPA’s mouthpiece claimed it was untrue that Pruitt met DOW CEO Andrew Liveris before deciding not to ban a Dow-made pesticide. In fact, the meeting, as reported by Biesecker, did take place; but it was removed from the EPA’s schedule. The two certainly met, at an energy conference in Houston.

The pesticide, by the way, is reckoned by scientists to affect the brain development of foetuses and infants. But Pruitt decided to allow its sale to continue. Whose environment is the agency protecting, precisely?
link to this extract

*Insane state of today’s advertising part 3.* • Google+

Artem Russakovski:


Companies like Cedato and (now OneByAOL?) are the scum of the Internet. Ads like these make me so mad. Just look at this shit.

A static ad loads. Then behind the scenes thousands of requests continue to execute, absolutely destroying browser performance. And the worst part is nothing is even happening on the screen – the ad that is showing is completely static.

Currently reproducible here:
1. Open Chrome Dev Tools on desktop.
2. Load up
3. Disable your ad blocker on that page and reload.
4. Observe the sad state of today’s advertising hasn’t changed in years since I first brought it up here and here

Advertising companies that do this – you are the reason people use ad blockers. Greedy and incompetent.


Russakovski is founder of and; anything that drives people to use adblockers is bad news for him. As has emerged, what’s going on here is fraud – stuffing video preroll ads into static ads.
link to this extract

Errata, corrigenda and ai no corrida: none notified

Website readers! You could sign up to receive each day’s Start Up post by email. You’ll need to click a confirmation link, so no spam. (Aren’t you glad you had to hunt this out rather than having it take over the page?)