cyberwars calls are conflicts that are generated in the network of the hands of hackers and that respond to political issues but usually not led by governments, the question may be a From control policies, which apply various governments, about attacks by hackers to companies vernacular versus lack of control over attacks on foreign firms ...
This note could be considered a continuation of my first posting on this blog called "Too much information (or how we learned to stop worrying and love the Internet)" . At the time, told the story of the beginning of Google and mentioned some paranoia that circulated around social networking and information sharing, but stressed that you have exposure in search engines and it was not so in the light or moderate and which you share on a network social. It aimed to stop worrying about being aware of that statement that you have the Internet but still participate and, at least that, I still think the same, it is clear that the Internet benefits us more than it hurts us but, having has some news that have been added in recent months on the best form, it may be wise to start worrying a little. Google
all know and, to a greater or lesser extent, use one or more of its pseudo-free products (I say pseudo because from teeny learned that if you give me something for free, simply, is because I did not even get the bill that is, everything has a cost and, in one way or another ends paying), on that note also commented on the landing of Google in China and some concessions had to make this giant computer that questioned its slogan "Do not be evil '(do not be evil). In part because of questions like that and in part by the continuing attacks from Chinese hackers, these people they were complicating the issue and have begun to have to talk about partnerships with historically less desirable, or at least people who one would not want to count among its friends, let alone among his enemies.
few days ago I read a note in Hugo Pardo Kuklinski 'The voice of Interior' which dealt with more than 500 improvements introduced Google in its algorithm, concerned about the progress of Bing (the form of Microsoft), the idea is to incorporate search engine news in real time (eg: information on flights of different airlines and delays), closing the note Kuklinski said that the huge growth (meritorious, it really is the best search engine) and its ambition to generate distrust of his altruism. Kuklinski
The note is inspired by a note The Wired , note that I also read and took me through links and googling, other notes on Google a little more apocalyptic: 'Google vs China and the new cyber-wars' Policy Argentina, 'Google ASKs ITS NSA to help secure network' (Google calls on the National Security Agency to help secure your network), 'Do not be evil Meet Spy on everyone' ('Do not be Evil' meets' Spy everyone '). 
In these notes, is a discussion of tensions between the U.S. and China (USA owes a lot of money and, above, invited the Dalai Lama to visit and that irritates significantly to its major creditor), the quasi-monopoly computer conflict with the government of the People's Republic of China and the cyber-wars.
cyberwars calls are conflicts that are generated in the network of the hands of hackers and that respond to political issues but usually not led by governments, the question may be from the control policies applied by different governments, about attacks by hackers to companies vernacular versus lack of control over attacks foreign companies (but not illogical to stop you will), on the other hand, we can not ignore the methods of some governments that have taken the Americans to solve economic problems or political inventing wars and our northern friends talk of war , whether cyber or not, fails to produce a frown, at the end of our digestive system, all the other inhabitants of world.
But my idea is not talking about foreign policy, but company policy, and I've noticed on Google for some points in common with the evolution of Microsoft (there are many other examples but these two companies are the most representative). 
Today, nobody remembers him, but Bill Gates also began developing its operating system for altruistic purposes and a good idea, like Page with Google. Bill was beginning his career as an idealistic hippie and his main goal was to bring technology to small companies and independent entrepreneurs to help them compete against large corporations, unfortunately, with the evolution de su idea, se fue desvaneciendo su filantropía y le fueron creciendo los colmillos corporativos. Finalmente, su proyecto se volvió tan ambicioso que se convirtió en el blanco preferido de infinidad de hackers (irónicamente, inspirados por sentimientos idealistas similares a los del joven Bill) y dio el pie para el surgimiento de sistemas alternativos que, si bien no lo llevaron a la quiebra, algún dolor de cabeza les habrá sumado a sus accionistas.
En aquel entonces, Gates terminó aliándose con la CIA generando muchísimas críticas en la comunidad informática y similar cantidad de paranoias en sus usuarios (paranoias que se cumplieron al descubrirse que el sistema operativo robaba datos de las máquinas de without even warn users about it.) Today Google is starting to talk to the NSA, it is not necessary to be a visionary to imagine similar consequences, I do not mean the death of Google, as some alarmists predict, but the criticism and attacks from the community and the need to review and refocus the business model. Microsoft continues to make millions but from these events, had to move and define new partnerships with other governments, business and technology communities to promote their products and hold them in the market and what he must have suffered a Bill, see growth competitors for their products and the emergence of new technology giants and new millionaires nerds in all the covers and TV.
Finally, take the example of Facebook , in my view, its success is due to two main strategies (beyond the excellent idea that gave birth), on the one hand, the ongoing study of their community and the refocusing business based on explicit or implicit criticism of the behavior of their users and, on the other hand, have shared a portion of their profits to their communities, to publish their API allows users could develop features that enrich the platform, in exchange to sell advertising on their sub pages and their applications within a community as large as is that of Facebook, something similar to what we do Ads with Google and Microsoft with the api of MSN, but evolved.
interesting thing you have published your api, beyond sharing some of their profits with their community comes from the hand to distribute information, if you develop a Facebook application, enter information for that application users , is hosted on servers in the company that developed the application and not on Facebook servers. From this opening, some of the applications within Facebook, businesses have become millionaires themselves, and even exceeded in many other social networking users to complete, to cite one example Farmville has more users than the Twitter itself, and the information ceases to be centralized into a single corporation and is distributed to various companies or individual undertakings, hampering the collection of the same and the malicious use of it.
However, the Facebook business model does not seem to be sufficiently distributed to avoid attacks by hackers, though, have not yet had to make alliances with security agencies, we can see that the instability of its operation and not due, only, and upgrades can be inferred that some hackers are starting to choose it as a new target for their evil. But the idea of \u200b\u200bdistributing the road and appeared to be the most desirable solution to avoid these problems and I think, just missing a ride over to the model thread facebookeano distributing and moderating further corporate greed.
way of thinking, I wonder if the solution is to build progressive and cooperative social networks, developed by communities of developers or development companies with a total distribution of information, ie none of them possess useful information (around the data) and in which all active members (ALL) receive their share in proportion to their contribution to the network, whether it be expanding capabilities, providing content, broadcasting that content, hardware or providing access to the web, statisticians and sociologists analyzing behavior and identifying community needs. In this way, hackers would find that there is no defined enemy who would fight and that violate an infinite number of servers to make up some useful information and even could be part of the business reporting security breaches, yes probably, these social networks should change its name and became known as social networking, it is known that this term is usually not welcomed by the Corporations.
except the first one, thank the community images morgueFile
0 comments:
Post a Comment