Given that India and the People’s Republic of China are now the fastest growing purchasers of the latest smartphones and tablet computers - should the next generation of these devices be more tailored to Asian users?
By: Ringo Bones
Even though these miracles of modern technology are designed in the West and then manufactured in the low-wage parts of the Far East, does it make good sense for the major “Westward Looking” consumer electronic companies start tailoring their next generation of smartphones and tablet computers for Asian users/customers? As of October 5, 2011, India and Mainland China had been shown from case studies to be slowly but continuously shown increasing demand for smartphones and tablet computers. And in these places, smartphones and tablet computers are for all intents and purposes the only way for ordinary people to access the internet.
Could we be seeing standard Mandarin and Sanskrit capable smartphones and tablet computers in the near future? Maybe, but given the internet had been very slow to adapt languages that doesn’t use the ubiquitous Roman letters, many see it as one of the obstacles in tailoring a significant number of next generation smartphones and tablet computers that could seamlessly be introduced to Indian Mainland Chinese markets, not to mention those that don’t use Roman letters in their written communications like Thai, Urdu or Pashtu.
But given retail consumerism that has been steadily shifting Eastward – as in toward the Mainland China and the Indian subcontinent, major consumer electronics firms may be ignoring this major chunk of the market at their own peril. Or maybe it could initiate a spin-off in devices that could smartly translate any written non-Roman lettered languages into something we at the deeply insular West can finally understand.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Monday, October 10, 2011
What Will Apple Be After Steve Jobs?
Known around the world for making the latest computer tech fashionable to a wide-range of folks – even to the fashionista crowd, will Apple continue to be one of the world’s top technology firms without Steve Jobs?
By: Ringo Bones
Even though he passed away in October 5, 2011 at age 56 after a long battle with pancreatic cancer, Apple co-founder and visionary will surely be missed. The computer technology company he co-founded with Steve Wozniak has always been seen as the “alternative” from the mainstream. Steve Jobs’ first ever major commercial product to be launched with much advertising fanfare was the 1984 era McIntosh, which itself was a technological tour-de-force at the time as to being the first ever personal computer that came with a mouse. Sadly, the 1984 era Mac didn’t do as well commercially in comparison to Steve Jobs’ more recent products.
The 1998 era rainbow-colored PC was probably the first toe-in-the-water exercise for Apple’s path to slowly but surely into becoming a consumer-electronic juggernaut of the 21st Century. From the i-Pod, the i-Phone to the i-Pad, Steve Jobs seem to manage to do the impossible by making computer technology hip and stylish enough for the fashionista crowd. Whether you love or hate his commercially successful inventions, there’s no denying that Steve Jobs is probably the most influential visionary when it comes to making portable internet access a commercially viable entity. Not to mention that during the height of his creative and managing powers at Apple, he forego focus groups and other corporate niceties citing that they tend to skew his creative vision.
Tributes had been pouring in of his untimely passing, from US President Barack Obama to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, not to mention rival computer companies and more importantly, the millions of people who have benefited from his vision of establishing user-friendly and “fashionable” access to the global information superhighway.
Will Apple still retain the vision and brilliant inventiveness of Steve Jobs? Only time will tell; but – to the millions of his fans – it seems like he has already mapped out the direction for Apple to go through for it to remain as a strong and visionary computer technology firm.
By: Ringo Bones
Even though he passed away in October 5, 2011 at age 56 after a long battle with pancreatic cancer, Apple co-founder and visionary will surely be missed. The computer technology company he co-founded with Steve Wozniak has always been seen as the “alternative” from the mainstream. Steve Jobs’ first ever major commercial product to be launched with much advertising fanfare was the 1984 era McIntosh, which itself was a technological tour-de-force at the time as to being the first ever personal computer that came with a mouse. Sadly, the 1984 era Mac didn’t do as well commercially in comparison to Steve Jobs’ more recent products.
The 1998 era rainbow-colored PC was probably the first toe-in-the-water exercise for Apple’s path to slowly but surely into becoming a consumer-electronic juggernaut of the 21st Century. From the i-Pod, the i-Phone to the i-Pad, Steve Jobs seem to manage to do the impossible by making computer technology hip and stylish enough for the fashionista crowd. Whether you love or hate his commercially successful inventions, there’s no denying that Steve Jobs is probably the most influential visionary when it comes to making portable internet access a commercially viable entity. Not to mention that during the height of his creative and managing powers at Apple, he forego focus groups and other corporate niceties citing that they tend to skew his creative vision.
Tributes had been pouring in of his untimely passing, from US President Barack Obama to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, not to mention rival computer companies and more importantly, the millions of people who have benefited from his vision of establishing user-friendly and “fashionable” access to the global information superhighway.
Will Apple still retain the vision and brilliant inventiveness of Steve Jobs? Only time will tell; but – to the millions of his fans – it seems like he has already mapped out the direction for Apple to go through for it to remain as a strong and visionary computer technology firm.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Do We Need Rules of Engagement in Cyber Conflicts?
Given the devastation and inconvenience of the cyber attacks directed at Estonia’s state internet infrastructure back in 2007 to the April 2011 hacking of Sony Playstation Network, do we need a legally binding rules of cyber conflicts?
By: Ringo Bones
During the 2011 Munich On-Line Security Conference, policymakers and powers-that-be had finally declared the internet or cyber space as the new battleground, but will it going to leave us mere civilians eventual road-kill in the information superhighway? Sadly, as the case maybe, there are yet no internationally binding agreements – similar to those of the Geneva and Hague Conventions – governing the rules of cyber conflicts and/ or cyber-warfare.
High-profile incidents of what could be described as cyber-warfare – i.e. got noted by the major news providers – already happened back in 2007 when a directed denial of service or DDOS attack directed at the state owned internet infrastructure of Estonia ground basic government services down to a halt. The alleged cyber-attack was primarily due to the removal of a Soviet-era World War II memorial without the consent of Kremlin – allegedly by Russian government sponsored computer hackers.
Sadly, there are still no legally binding agreements modeled after the Geneva and Hague Conventions governing the dos and don’ts of cyber-warfare. Could this mean that micro-finance groups of refugees or other ethnic minorities could have their financial databases declared as fair game during a cyber-attack? And does this also mean that databases of children’s hospitals could be fair game too during an all-out cyber-war making kids awaiting organ transplants to be not able to receive life-saving medical procedures in a timely fashion?
Do we really have to wait to hear of accounts of wanton incidents of cruelties of cyber-warfare and/or cyber-terrorism similar to that of “Un Souvenir de Solferino” / “A Souvenir of Solferino” as written by J. Henri Dunant back in 1862 that eventually became the basis of the establishment of the International Red Cross and the Geneva and Hague Conventions? Sadder still, even the ontological definition of what passes as cyber-attack and/or cyber-terrorism is still deemed “nebulous” by legal standards.
Various criminal organizations and rogue states around the world could still get away with launching audacious cyber-attacks even when the evidence is stacked against them – pricey lawyers or not – not only due to the lack of conventions governing it, but also primarily due to lack of enforcement in most territories around the world when it comes to cyber-terrorism prosecution. Cyber-warfare today is about as convention-free as the Crimean War.
By: Ringo Bones
During the 2011 Munich On-Line Security Conference, policymakers and powers-that-be had finally declared the internet or cyber space as the new battleground, but will it going to leave us mere civilians eventual road-kill in the information superhighway? Sadly, as the case maybe, there are yet no internationally binding agreements – similar to those of the Geneva and Hague Conventions – governing the rules of cyber conflicts and/ or cyber-warfare.
High-profile incidents of what could be described as cyber-warfare – i.e. got noted by the major news providers – already happened back in 2007 when a directed denial of service or DDOS attack directed at the state owned internet infrastructure of Estonia ground basic government services down to a halt. The alleged cyber-attack was primarily due to the removal of a Soviet-era World War II memorial without the consent of Kremlin – allegedly by Russian government sponsored computer hackers.
Sadly, there are still no legally binding agreements modeled after the Geneva and Hague Conventions governing the dos and don’ts of cyber-warfare. Could this mean that micro-finance groups of refugees or other ethnic minorities could have their financial databases declared as fair game during a cyber-attack? And does this also mean that databases of children’s hospitals could be fair game too during an all-out cyber-war making kids awaiting organ transplants to be not able to receive life-saving medical procedures in a timely fashion?
Do we really have to wait to hear of accounts of wanton incidents of cruelties of cyber-warfare and/or cyber-terrorism similar to that of “Un Souvenir de Solferino” / “A Souvenir of Solferino” as written by J. Henri Dunant back in 1862 that eventually became the basis of the establishment of the International Red Cross and the Geneva and Hague Conventions? Sadder still, even the ontological definition of what passes as cyber-attack and/or cyber-terrorism is still deemed “nebulous” by legal standards.
Various criminal organizations and rogue states around the world could still get away with launching audacious cyber-attacks even when the evidence is stacked against them – pricey lawyers or not – not only due to the lack of conventions governing it, but also primarily due to lack of enforcement in most territories around the world when it comes to cyber-terrorism prosecution. Cyber-warfare today is about as convention-free as the Crimean War.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Medical Apps To Turn Your Smartphone Into A Stethoscope
The latest downloadable apps have made existing smartphones double-up as something else, but can a medical app be used to make your smartphone double-up as a stethoscope or other viable medical diagnostic instrument?
By: Ringo Bones
Unfortunately, we don’t yet have X-Ray capable light-emitting-diodes that can allow current smartphones to double-up as portable hand-held medical X-Ray machines. But given that the built-in microphones in a majority of smartphones made by leading-brand manufacturers are supposedly as sensitive as the diaphragms of the medical doctor’s / general practitioner’s stethoscope; can downloading certain medical apps really make our smartphones double up as a medical-grade stethoscope?
One advantage that a mobile smartphone has over a traditional run-of-the-mill medical stethoscope is that the resulting medical data or diagnoses can be e-mailed to a certified medical doctor. Converting your smartphone into a viable and reliable medical diagnostic instrument can certainly be an advantage if you live in an area when a visit to a doctor involves a 3-hour – or longer – travel time.
Though smartphones with medical apps – if you don’t even have the most basic of medical training – is certainly no match to a well-trained medical doctor wielding a traditional stethoscope, it can be very useful in providing relatively inexpensive real-time medical diagnosis. Very useful if your pre-existing heart condition demands constant real-time monitoring without the prohibitive costs of dedicated hospital-based medical diagnostic gear.
By: Ringo Bones
Unfortunately, we don’t yet have X-Ray capable light-emitting-diodes that can allow current smartphones to double-up as portable hand-held medical X-Ray machines. But given that the built-in microphones in a majority of smartphones made by leading-brand manufacturers are supposedly as sensitive as the diaphragms of the medical doctor’s / general practitioner’s stethoscope; can downloading certain medical apps really make our smartphones double up as a medical-grade stethoscope?
One advantage that a mobile smartphone has over a traditional run-of-the-mill medical stethoscope is that the resulting medical data or diagnoses can be e-mailed to a certified medical doctor. Converting your smartphone into a viable and reliable medical diagnostic instrument can certainly be an advantage if you live in an area when a visit to a doctor involves a 3-hour – or longer – travel time.
Though smartphones with medical apps – if you don’t even have the most basic of medical training – is certainly no match to a well-trained medical doctor wielding a traditional stethoscope, it can be very useful in providing relatively inexpensive real-time medical diagnosis. Very useful if your pre-existing heart condition demands constant real-time monitoring without the prohibitive costs of dedicated hospital-based medical diagnostic gear.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Much Ado About Blackberry Circa 2010
Slated to be banned in some countries due to still unresolved security concerns, will this eventually make RIM’s Blackberry to be consigned to the mobile phone / computer’s dustbin of history?
By: Ringo Bones
Ever since Research in Motion (RIM) rolled out their first generation Blackberry back in 1999, early adapters hailed it as the mobile telecommunications revolution for the new millennium. Security and privacy concerns – including the odd Y2K bug issue or two – back then were more often than not, relegated to the backburner. Fast forward to the scheduled August 5, 2010 launch of the latest Blackberry model called the Torch, will security concerns cited by conservative Gulf Region Islamic states eventually relegate the use of such devices to more libertine locales?
The first high-profile row over the security concerns of RIM’s Blackberry got major press coverage when several units were eventually found out to been used in the tragic November 2008 Mumbai Terror Attacks. Then the issue inextricably was forgotten once again. Fast forward to July 2010 when once again the UAE government – specifically the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority, UAE - threatens to ban the use of RIM’s Blackberry on their home soil unless RIM allows their local law enforcement agencies access to the heavily encrypted instant messages being trafficked by such devices. Saudi Arabia too threatens to ban Blackberry use by Friday, August 6, 2010 if their local law enforcement agencies were not allowed access to the encrypted instant messaging data. But are the concerns of UAE and Saudi Arabian law enforcement agencies over encrypted Blackberry instant messages warranted?
Given the conservative nature of such states which rank adultery and premarital fornication about as serious as armed robbery, the encrypted nature of RIM’s Blackberry’s instant messaging feature has long been the thorn in the side of the various Gulf States’ local “morality police”. It is because – more often than not – Blackberrys and similar devices – were often used as private messaging systems that enables some to engage in clandestine adulterous trysts. Given the local police in conservative Gulf States don’t have access to heavily encrypted Blackberry data, which are the sole corporate property of Research in Motion, the Saudi and UAE governments are crying foul over their inability to penalize widespread acts of adultery committed on their home soil.
When it comes to the individual user’s security issue, Blackberry is widely used for some years now in China, Canada and the United States – all are very security conscious countries who has yet to find major security concerns for such devices. A lot of high-profile government officials also use RIM’s Blackberry including US President Barack Obama and as of late, they seem to find the security of their Blackberry adequate. Even though this can be use as proof that on a global level Research in Motion’s Blackberry are one of the world’s most secure mobile phone providers, this does pose a problem to governments who want’s to play a more “Big Brother” role over their citizenry. Dubai may plan to ban their local Blackberry’s instant messaging (IM) and e-mail services, but it could prove devastating to their supposedly business friendly territory when corporate entities reliant on such devices may leave in droves due to the inconvenience. An inconvenience that’s not economically viable in the already fiscally austere post global credit crunch climate of 2010.
By: Ringo Bones
Ever since Research in Motion (RIM) rolled out their first generation Blackberry back in 1999, early adapters hailed it as the mobile telecommunications revolution for the new millennium. Security and privacy concerns – including the odd Y2K bug issue or two – back then were more often than not, relegated to the backburner. Fast forward to the scheduled August 5, 2010 launch of the latest Blackberry model called the Torch, will security concerns cited by conservative Gulf Region Islamic states eventually relegate the use of such devices to more libertine locales?
The first high-profile row over the security concerns of RIM’s Blackberry got major press coverage when several units were eventually found out to been used in the tragic November 2008 Mumbai Terror Attacks. Then the issue inextricably was forgotten once again. Fast forward to July 2010 when once again the UAE government – specifically the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority, UAE - threatens to ban the use of RIM’s Blackberry on their home soil unless RIM allows their local law enforcement agencies access to the heavily encrypted instant messages being trafficked by such devices. Saudi Arabia too threatens to ban Blackberry use by Friday, August 6, 2010 if their local law enforcement agencies were not allowed access to the encrypted instant messaging data. But are the concerns of UAE and Saudi Arabian law enforcement agencies over encrypted Blackberry instant messages warranted?
Given the conservative nature of such states which rank adultery and premarital fornication about as serious as armed robbery, the encrypted nature of RIM’s Blackberry’s instant messaging feature has long been the thorn in the side of the various Gulf States’ local “morality police”. It is because – more often than not – Blackberrys and similar devices – were often used as private messaging systems that enables some to engage in clandestine adulterous trysts. Given the local police in conservative Gulf States don’t have access to heavily encrypted Blackberry data, which are the sole corporate property of Research in Motion, the Saudi and UAE governments are crying foul over their inability to penalize widespread acts of adultery committed on their home soil.
When it comes to the individual user’s security issue, Blackberry is widely used for some years now in China, Canada and the United States – all are very security conscious countries who has yet to find major security concerns for such devices. A lot of high-profile government officials also use RIM’s Blackberry including US President Barack Obama and as of late, they seem to find the security of their Blackberry adequate. Even though this can be use as proof that on a global level Research in Motion’s Blackberry are one of the world’s most secure mobile phone providers, this does pose a problem to governments who want’s to play a more “Big Brother” role over their citizenry. Dubai may plan to ban their local Blackberry’s instant messaging (IM) and e-mail services, but it could prove devastating to their supposedly business friendly territory when corporate entities reliant on such devices may leave in droves due to the inconvenience. An inconvenience that’s not economically viable in the already fiscally austere post global credit crunch climate of 2010.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Can We Still Send Our e-mails After A Nuclear Attack?
Given that Nuclear Armageddon never went away with the end of the Cold War, can anyone of us still be able to send e-mails after a nuclear attack?
By: Ringo Bones
With increasing tension between North and South Korea over the “apparent” sinking of a south Korean warship with the loss of 46 sailors plus other current geopolitical issues like Iran’s clandestine nuclear weapons program and the long-term prospects of Taiwan’s independence from Beijing. It seems like the Doomsday Clock at the headquarters of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is permanently stuck at two minutes to midnight. But can the perennial threat of nuclear annihilation ever dampen our desire to stay connected to everyone we love?
The US Postal Service might have had the edge when it comes to legal precedents and procedural guidelines on how to deliver mail after a nuclear attack to American citizens fortunate enough to have survived it; But what about our Internet infrastructure? But first here’s a primer on how the US Postal Service intends to deliver mail despite of the dangers of cesium 137 and strontium 90 rich fallout.
As far back as the early 1950s, the US Postal Service developed an emergency planning manual that outlines procedures to allow mail delivery following a nuclear attack. These plans were regularly updated to cope with what might happen when a real nuclear attack happens and the last complete revision was undertaken back in 1981. In addition, Executive Order 11490 that dates from October 28, 1969, as amended by Executive Order 11921, dated June 11, 1976, assigned the US Postal Service the responsibility for emergency mail service and other duties associated with civil defense programs.
In addition to handling post nuclear strike mail delivery, the US Postal Service at the time was assigned the responsibility of distributing and collecting special change-of-address and safety notification cards to facilitate mail delivery and help other government agencies and family members locate survivors. At the time, some 60 million change-of-address cards were printed and stored at about 30,000 post offices across America – where perhaps they remain. Detailed instructions were also stockpiled, telling people how to fill out forms and account for any missing persons. And for postal officials – how to test the cards and other documents for radioactivity before processing them. Among the actions outlined in the 1981 revisions include the authorization of local postmasters to burn stamps as to prevent them from falling into enemy hands. Restricting post-nuclear-attack mail to first-class letters and place an immediate ban on the issuance of money orders for payment in the country that attacked the United States.
At a 1982 congressional hearing, A US Postal Service official acknowledged that a massive attack would at the very least make implementing the agency’s plans very difficult. But he defended them by saying the agency must be prepared. Members of Congress questioned the viability of the post office plans, given the US Postal Service’s reliance on volunteer mail carriers and the likelihood that major road systems would be destroyed and the availability of gasoline sharply curtailed – if not eliminated after a nuclear attack. When it was pointed out that not many people would be left alive, let alone still be willing to read, write and send letters after the nuclear bomb explodes – the official remarked: “But those that are will get their mail.” Fast forward few weeks after the September 11, 2001 Terror Attacks, the US Postal Service experienced first hand their first ever biological terror attack after lethal anthrax were sent via the US Mail. Though somewhat unprepared, they managed to handle and diffused the threat.
But what about are current Internet infrastructure that, it seems, we can’t live without? Unfortunately, the electromagnetic pulse of a sufficiently large enough nuclear explosion can fry every functioning electronic gear hundreds of miles from its epicenter. Especially if its solid-state components are not hardened against EMP. Clandestine nuclear test from rogue nations can still wreak havoc on our fragile Internet infrastructure since they don’t explode their test nukes in those state-of-the-art blast chambers that are equipped with a built in Faraday Cage. Like those used in a typical Nevada underground test site. Unless you have the real estate and the revenue to use vacuum tubes in your Internet servers, your web infrastructure probably can’t survive a nuclear attack. It might be a “Dr. Strangeloveian” prospect, but your e-mail and Internet surfing privileges are probably the first ones to go during a nuclear attack.
By: Ringo Bones
With increasing tension between North and South Korea over the “apparent” sinking of a south Korean warship with the loss of 46 sailors plus other current geopolitical issues like Iran’s clandestine nuclear weapons program and the long-term prospects of Taiwan’s independence from Beijing. It seems like the Doomsday Clock at the headquarters of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is permanently stuck at two minutes to midnight. But can the perennial threat of nuclear annihilation ever dampen our desire to stay connected to everyone we love?
The US Postal Service might have had the edge when it comes to legal precedents and procedural guidelines on how to deliver mail after a nuclear attack to American citizens fortunate enough to have survived it; But what about our Internet infrastructure? But first here’s a primer on how the US Postal Service intends to deliver mail despite of the dangers of cesium 137 and strontium 90 rich fallout.
As far back as the early 1950s, the US Postal Service developed an emergency planning manual that outlines procedures to allow mail delivery following a nuclear attack. These plans were regularly updated to cope with what might happen when a real nuclear attack happens and the last complete revision was undertaken back in 1981. In addition, Executive Order 11490 that dates from October 28, 1969, as amended by Executive Order 11921, dated June 11, 1976, assigned the US Postal Service the responsibility for emergency mail service and other duties associated with civil defense programs.
In addition to handling post nuclear strike mail delivery, the US Postal Service at the time was assigned the responsibility of distributing and collecting special change-of-address and safety notification cards to facilitate mail delivery and help other government agencies and family members locate survivors. At the time, some 60 million change-of-address cards were printed and stored at about 30,000 post offices across America – where perhaps they remain. Detailed instructions were also stockpiled, telling people how to fill out forms and account for any missing persons. And for postal officials – how to test the cards and other documents for radioactivity before processing them. Among the actions outlined in the 1981 revisions include the authorization of local postmasters to burn stamps as to prevent them from falling into enemy hands. Restricting post-nuclear-attack mail to first-class letters and place an immediate ban on the issuance of money orders for payment in the country that attacked the United States.
At a 1982 congressional hearing, A US Postal Service official acknowledged that a massive attack would at the very least make implementing the agency’s plans very difficult. But he defended them by saying the agency must be prepared. Members of Congress questioned the viability of the post office plans, given the US Postal Service’s reliance on volunteer mail carriers and the likelihood that major road systems would be destroyed and the availability of gasoline sharply curtailed – if not eliminated after a nuclear attack. When it was pointed out that not many people would be left alive, let alone still be willing to read, write and send letters after the nuclear bomb explodes – the official remarked: “But those that are will get their mail.” Fast forward few weeks after the September 11, 2001 Terror Attacks, the US Postal Service experienced first hand their first ever biological terror attack after lethal anthrax were sent via the US Mail. Though somewhat unprepared, they managed to handle and diffused the threat.
But what about are current Internet infrastructure that, it seems, we can’t live without? Unfortunately, the electromagnetic pulse of a sufficiently large enough nuclear explosion can fry every functioning electronic gear hundreds of miles from its epicenter. Especially if its solid-state components are not hardened against EMP. Clandestine nuclear test from rogue nations can still wreak havoc on our fragile Internet infrastructure since they don’t explode their test nukes in those state-of-the-art blast chambers that are equipped with a built in Faraday Cage. Like those used in a typical Nevada underground test site. Unless you have the real estate and the revenue to use vacuum tubes in your Internet servers, your web infrastructure probably can’t survive a nuclear attack. It might be a “Dr. Strangeloveian” prospect, but your e-mail and Internet surfing privileges are probably the first ones to go during a nuclear attack.
Monday, January 26, 2009
The Obama Presidency: Good for the Internet?
Known for using the Blackberry and social networking on the Internet to his political advantage, will newly elected US President Barack Obama return the favor by improving America’s Internet infrastructure?
By: Vanessa Uy
Despite attempts at objectivity, most of us still find it hard not to fall in love with the newly elected US President Barack Obama, especially his political platform. But basing on his “restoring science to its rightful place” portion of his inaugural speech, does the newly elected president be able to fulfil his promise of improving America’s Internet infrastructure which according to some telecommunications experts is on average 15 years out of date. Even President Obama’s Internet address points out that the US is ranked 15th in global broadband adoption.
According to save the internet.com, broadband technology in the US is not only in some parts 15 years behind, but also even in highly urbanized areas, broadband Internet infrastructure is largely underutilized – even untapped – when it comes to its educational related use. Given the on-going global economic downturn, should information technology firms reevaluate their goals for 2009? Especially when most of the world’s commercial activity is now under Internet hegemony.
Calling US President Barack Obama as the first “Internet President” would be an understatement if you knew the true extent of his knowledge of the utility of the on-line medium when it comes to the US political campaign landscape. Not only that, he is also the first US president to have his official portrait taken with a digital camera, it is safe to say that President Obama is also the first US president to have fully embraced the “digital revolution”. Given President Obama’s affinity and savvy of the Internet, is there anything he has to gain from it in its improvement.
President Obama’s “Blackberry dependence” would be less of a headache to the US Secret Service personnel assigned to him if the Internet infrastructure is improved to the point that on-line security safeguards can be added with the ease comparable to that of mathematical geniuses envision very large prime numbers. Plus an improved American Internet system could create its own contribution in stimulating the ailing global economy since these days our worldwide commerce is largely Internet-based. Not only that, education – on a global scale - could benefit as well when new ideas can easily be spread around the world. Like reexamining the way we approach in the treatment of some cancers and related medical research. The Internet is now an indispensable part of the global economy. If America starts to improve theirs, very soon, our global economic downturn will not last as long as predicted by naysayers.
By: Vanessa Uy
Despite attempts at objectivity, most of us still find it hard not to fall in love with the newly elected US President Barack Obama, especially his political platform. But basing on his “restoring science to its rightful place” portion of his inaugural speech, does the newly elected president be able to fulfil his promise of improving America’s Internet infrastructure which according to some telecommunications experts is on average 15 years out of date. Even President Obama’s Internet address points out that the US is ranked 15th in global broadband adoption.
According to save the internet.com, broadband technology in the US is not only in some parts 15 years behind, but also even in highly urbanized areas, broadband Internet infrastructure is largely underutilized – even untapped – when it comes to its educational related use. Given the on-going global economic downturn, should information technology firms reevaluate their goals for 2009? Especially when most of the world’s commercial activity is now under Internet hegemony.
Calling US President Barack Obama as the first “Internet President” would be an understatement if you knew the true extent of his knowledge of the utility of the on-line medium when it comes to the US political campaign landscape. Not only that, he is also the first US president to have his official portrait taken with a digital camera, it is safe to say that President Obama is also the first US president to have fully embraced the “digital revolution”. Given President Obama’s affinity and savvy of the Internet, is there anything he has to gain from it in its improvement.
President Obama’s “Blackberry dependence” would be less of a headache to the US Secret Service personnel assigned to him if the Internet infrastructure is improved to the point that on-line security safeguards can be added with the ease comparable to that of mathematical geniuses envision very large prime numbers. Plus an improved American Internet system could create its own contribution in stimulating the ailing global economy since these days our worldwide commerce is largely Internet-based. Not only that, education – on a global scale - could benefit as well when new ideas can easily be spread around the world. Like reexamining the way we approach in the treatment of some cancers and related medical research. The Internet is now an indispensable part of the global economy. If America starts to improve theirs, very soon, our global economic downturn will not last as long as predicted by naysayers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
