July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Tickets On Sale Now

On the same day the New York Times runs a story about how a faceless squad of hackers on the other side of the world has gone unchecked in a race to penetrate frightening chunks of the digital grid, I am sitting across from author, blogger, and activist Cory Doctorow.

He’s seated cross-legged, perched on a wooden table. The setting is an independent bookstore, where Doctorow proceeds to tell stories he’s told dozens of times already on this book tour — yet still manages to make them seem as fresh as they probably did the first time.

He sways, gestures invitingly, and adjusts his large-rimmed glasses, always in motion. He’s self-effacing, the way he calls himself a Patchouli-scented info hippie. And he talks with intensity of purpose, like a man always running out of time.

At his book signings, the co-editor of the website BoingBoing is not an author so much as a Jeremiah of the web. Never mind promoting “Homeland,” the follow to his 2008 bestseller “Little Brother.” He’ll get around to that.

Getting our policy badly wrong

First, he walks through a litany of episodes from the department of “truth is stranger than fiction.” He recaps examples of technology devices that have been co-opted and turned against their owners.

It’s partly our fault. One of the things wrong with the world, Doctorow insists, is that enough people aren’t demanding that devices be made differently, “so that people can see inside them.”

The default posture of computers is ‘Yes, master’ or ‘I can’t let you do that, Dave.’ It’s up to us decide, because the world we live in is made of computers. Your house is a computer. We are increasingly putting little computers inside our body. Your car is a computer that hurtles down the highway.

People are free when they know the reality of the world. Yet we continue to treat the Internet as though it were nothing but a glorified system for cable and phone calls.

Before he gets around to exposing the still-raw nerve that is his reaction to the suicide of his close friend Aaron Swartz, Doctorow continues with a segué that doesn’t let the public off the hook. He laments the frequency with which users tap “Agree” when confronted with Byzantine Terms of Service agreements and software updates, an action that’s a kind of mindless surrender to the complexities of the Internet age.

From there (and he still hasn’t yet bothered to beat his chest and tout the book that’s brought him here) he blasts prosecutors run amok and talks about how lawmakers “keep getting our policy badly wrong” when it comes to computers.

There’s no way to legislate what computer users can’t do or shouldn’t do, because no sooner than the ink has dried on that bill would such a law be rendered obsolete by the pace of technological change. Yet along the way, in Doctorow’s telling of the story, legal protection of the free flow of information gave way to a kind of mutual protection racket.

Information that’s supposed to be free and public got shut away, where it’s kept under lock and key.

Remembering Aaron Swartz

“I knew Aaron for more than half his life,” Doctorow said, bringing the discussion around to the loss of a pioneer of Internet freedom. “Aaron was one of those bright kids who blew the grading curve. His parents let him leave school.”

Years ago, Doctorow was dating someone who had volunteered to be Swartz’s chaperone around San Francisco when the young teenager was visiting and involved in Internet work far beyond his years.

“We picked him up,” Doctorow remembers. “I remember he was the world’s worst eater. We fed him awful food. I remember thinking, this kid’s going to go somewhere – if he doesn’t die of scurvy.”

Swartz, of course, went on to work at Reddit. He got wealthy but stayed restless and reckless. He couldn’t shut off his ambitiousness, Doctorow remembers, not when he was “liberating” 20 percent of the most widely cited case law from the PACER electronic court records system and not when he was taking advantage of MIT’s public wifi and downloading academic journal articles.

The researchers behind those articles, Doctorow said, are “uncovering tiny chunks of the truth of the world, and we don’t get to see it. If you’re a random person, you can’t get it. And that matters, because we don’t know where the next innovation will come from. I think the world is better when we know the truth of it.”

MIT kept locking Swartz down, Doctorow said, trying to tweak the network and kick him out. At one point, Swartz walked into a closet and plugged directly into the system and downloaded millions of documents.

A prosecutor brought charges against him, threatened decades’ worth of jail time. Swartz said he’d fight it. Doctorow recalled lawyers who “started to play dirty,” denying Swartz documents he was entitled to.

“He kept working,” Doctorow said. “You may remember that dumb law, SOPA. Aaron was one of the people who helped fight and kill that.”

Just over a month ago, Swartz hanged himself in his New York apartment. Doctorow says he’s still trying to make sense of that.

Drawing from life

It’s hard not to be reminded of Swartz in Doctorow’s new story, about a young hacktivist who’s detained and roughed up by the feds. As a matter of fact, Swartz helped Doctorow write the book.

“When I was working on this book, I asked Aaron for help,” Doctorow said.

Swartz sent Doctorow a missing piece he needed for the story. Doctorow didn’t know how he’d describe it, but he wanted to include a mention of a next-gen device that could be used to mobilize voters without needing to rely on the moneyed interests or power brokers who run the current political structure.

Swartz sent him a few paragraphs that Doctorow liked so much he used them verbatim.

Doctorow wraps up his brief remarks by turning to something he’s written down. He’s promised Swartz’s family he would talk about this on the book tour.

“These are things I would have said to Aaron if he’d called me.”

Doctorow’s voice wavers a bit. He presumes there are people in the crowd who’ve dealt with depression.

“I know I have.”

Trying to maintain a steadiness in his voice, Doctorow tells the crowd that “dead people can’t solve problems.” That whatever problems Schwartz was facing, killing himself didn’t solve them. “They will go unsolved forever.”

That “if he was lonely, he will never again be embraced by his friends. If he was despairing of the fight, he will never again rally his comrades with his brilliant leadership.”

And that’s it. There are questions from the audience, and Doctorow promises to “render your books un-returnable” by signing them.

One of the several things striking about him is the way he can pull off a difficult feat. He’s served to rally the faithful — this small crowd of the faithful, admittedly — in defense of the cause of Internet freedom. And he gives them marching orders, without even having to tell them what those orders are.

Photo credit: JonathanWorth.com

Updated at 8:57 a.m Pacific time with more details about AppData’s tracking.

Instagram may have lost about 25 percent of its daily active users since people started revolting over a questionable terms of service change, according to tracking from AppData.

On Dec. 17, Instagram changed its terms of service to make way for advertising, but it wrote it in a way that users interpreted as a plan to sell their photos. Naturally, users were upset, and many even threatened to quit using to photo service. Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom quickly retracted the changes, saying, “It is not our intention to sell your photos.”

The Facebook-owned photo-sharing service, which is one of the most popular apps across mobile devices, dropped from 16.4 million daily users the week the terms of service changes debuted to 12.4 million users this week, according to AppData’s metrics. It’s worth noting that AppData only measures Instagram use of people who have connected their Instagram account with Facebook. While that’s still a fair amount of users being tracked, it certainly doesn’t measure all Instagram activity.

“[We are] pretty sure the decline in Instagram users was due to the terms of service announcement,” AppData told The New York Post.

Instagram denies that a decline in users has actually happened. “This data is inaccurate,” Instagram said in a widely circulated statement. “We continue to see strong and steady growth in both registered and active users of Instagram.”

Both Quartz and The Next Web also argue that the report is bogus, but it’s hard to say that AppData is completely off. Instagram uploads hit an all-time high on Thanksgiving this year, so it’s weird that the service wouldn’t have experienced similar bump in uploads during Christmas. It’s also weird that Instagram would have experienced a decline in usage on Christmas, too.

One other reason to potentially take AppData’s info with a grain of salt: Weekly active users and monthly active users continue to rise for Instagram. AppData’s latest monthly active user count for Instagram sits at 43.6 million users, while the weekly active users number sit at 29.4 million.

Notably, prolific Instagram user Kim Kardashian (pictured), who has 5.8 million followers, has not posted a photo of herself on the service since the privacy debacle. Her reaction could indicate that celebs may be questioning their Instagram use and are becoming less willing to post pictures of themselves as well.

Instagram was acquired by Facebook earlier this year in a deal worth $715 million. Facebook’s stock is currently down 2.5 percent, which is likely due to the Instagram news as well as uncertainly over the “fiscal cliff.”

Kim Kardashian via Instagram

Andrew Nicol is an attorney based in New York City. He was previously a corporate associate at Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP and now runs Clickwrapped, an online report that reviews and scores leading consumer websites according to how well they respect the rights of their users. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School. You can follow him on Twitter at @aknicol.

Last night, Microsoft began notifying the users of its online services (including Bing, Hotmail, MSN and Office.com) about changes to the Microsoft Services Agreement. A cursory glance at the announcement email might make it seem like all that’s happened is some innocent redrafting — Microsoft says that they’ve “modified the agreement to make it easier to read and understand” by introducing a “question and answer format”. But take care. There are two key changes — and they are both bad for users.

1. Microsoft can share your content between its services

The previous version of the agreement allowed Microsoft to use your content “solely to the extent necessary to provide the service”. The revised agreement allows Microsoft to use your content to “provide, protect and improve” all “Microsoft products and services”. This means, for example, that your Hotmail messages or Office.com documents could be displayed in Bing search results. In the announcement email, Microsoft alludes to this change. It says that its “cloud services” are being designed “to be highly integrated across many Microsoft products”.

Microsoft is not alone in allowing data sharing across its various products. Google’s terms of service contains a similar clause. Big data is becoming big business, and Microsoft probably thinks that it needs to be on an equal footing with its competitors in being able to use customer data across its entire spectrum of cloud services. But this change has substantial privacy implications. It means that personal information that previously could only be used for the limited purpose of providing a single service can now be shared throughout the Microsoft corporate structure. Your data could ultimately be used for something that has no relationship at all to the purpose for which you provided it. For example, people are now mostly comfortable with the idea of Google scanning your email in order to display relevant search results in Gmail. But what if Microsoft started scanning your Office documents and displaying related ads in your Bing searches?

2. You no longer have a right to sue Microsoft in court

Microsoft is now the latest of a growing number of companies (including Netflix and PayPal) that requires its users to resolve any disputes with the company by binding arbitration. This means that you give up your right to sue Microsoft in court. You also give up your right to bring a class action suit. Mandatory arbitration is dangerous because most consumers think that if they have a dispute with a merchant, they will have access to the judicial system and all of its rights and protections, such as bringing a class action, having their case heard by a judge, and the right to appeal. These rights do not exist in arbitration proceedings.

The updated terms take effect on October 19, and you are deemed to agree to them if you continue to use Microsoft services after that date.

Photo: James Pikover/VentureBeat

The eBay for unique goods marketplace has grown dramatically recently, pulling in $525 million in sales last year. When startups grow, challenges are inevitable, and one of them is ensuring that the company’s culture and vision survive.

Source: Etsy

Charming “Human Teeth Bracelet,” by Deathany97

So Etsy laid down the law this past week, updating its prohibited items list.

Definitely out are skulls, bones, skeletons, and bodily fluids. Preserved tissues or organs are verboten too, so that freakishly awesome white devil scalp you inherited from your ancestors will just have to stay in the family a little longer.

Teeth continue to be kosher however, so you will still be able to purchase this tasteful Human Teeth Bracelet from the cheerfully-named up-and-coming artiste Deathany97.

For some reason, drugs are also not something Etsy wants to sell. (Probably a non-compete contract with stealth-mode South American entrepreneurs.)

That includes drug paraphernalia such as hash skillets and tobacco products. But tobacco pipes are still allowed, provided they do not have carburetors.

(Google helpfully informed me that a pipe carburetor has absolutely nothing to do with a internal combustion engine.)

Speaking of which, Etsy does not want to sell your motor vehicle, boat, or RV. And hazardous materials such as mercury, matches, and lighter fluid are out too.

Cool cat nap his-and-hers pillowcases? Still absolutely and defiantly in.

Source: Etsy

His-and-hers cat nap pillowcases

Image credit: DM7/ShutterStock

Three cheers, apartment hunters! PadMapper creator Eric DeMenthon found a “legally kosher” way to reinstate Craigslist data on his rental-finding website after Craigslist blocked the site from using its content last month.

PadMapper takes data on apartments for rent from a number of sources and displays search results visually. People can search by area, number of bedroom and bathrooms, price range, and whether the vacancy is a full lease, a sublet or a room to share. These results are then displayed as pin-drops over a Google Map so you can see just where you are in your requested location. A good number of these results came from Craigslist, which is now known to be a hub for apartment hunters.

“It still seems somewhat dickish to go against their wishes in this,” said DeMenthon in a blog post. “But then I did some back of the envelope estimates of how much of people’s time and effort it would waste if I didn’t, and it became clear how much less nice it is to waste the time of millions of apartment hunters out of stubbornness or some clearly inaccurate assumption about the will of the community.”

The company was cut off from using Craigslist’s data in June after the online classifieds company said PadMapper was violating its terms of service. That is, Craigslist specifically says it doesn’t allow, “Copying, aggregation, display, distribution, performance, or derivative use of Craigslist or any content posted on Craigslist.” The “legally kosher” work around stems from the fact that PadMapper will no longer be tapping into Craigslist’s servers to get the data. Instead it will be using an API supplied by 3taps, which gathers Craigslist’s data “via indirect means.”

After the disappointing cut off of data, DeMenthon turned to his own for-rent listing site PadLister as a source for listings. His intention was to have small-time landlords and subletters directly post their vacancies to the website, though it seems DeMenthon realized Craigslist really is the goldmine. PadLister seemingly hasn’t gone away, however, and the website does have other nice perks such as syndication to varying rental websites other than PadMapper.

The providers of an inspiration service turned inward for some much-needed inspiration of their own, and have updated their terms of service following feedback from community members.

Run-away social sensation Pinterest has, after consulting with members, revised its terms of service Friday in light of growing scrutiny. It has removed terms that would allow it to sell content posted to the site. The new policies will go into effect on April 6, two weeks from today.

Pinterest, as you likely know, is the digital inspiration board site where arts, crafts, fashion, and food enthusiasts “pin” products to collections called “boards.” The site has emerged as a top 10 social network and grew its unique visitor count by 52 percent to 17.8 million people in February.

The changes to Pinterest’s terms of service represent a necessary step considering the company’s transition from a tiny upstart to the talk of the entire Internet. The previously generic terms have been replaced with language more appropriate for where Pinterest is headed.

Most notably, Pinterest has eliminated the clause that would have allowed it to sell content pinned to the site. “Selling content was never our intention and we removed this from our updated Terms,” co-founder Ben Silbermann said in blog post on the updated policies.

Language has also been added to the acceptable use policy that will allow the company to wipe out pins that encourage self-harm or self-abuse. Silbermann also briefly touched on revised language that should cover the site as it releases new features such as a coming-soon API and private boards.

Friday’s changes, however, fail to address many of the copyright infringement concerns outlined by the photographer community.

Lawyer and one-time Pinterest-lover Kirten Kowalski, for instance, ostentatiously deleted her boards after learning that Pinterest’s terms of service could leave her vulnerable to copyright litigation. The new terms of service still state the user is “solely responsible” for the content they pin to the site.

Google is changing its privacy policy, consolidating 60 different policies into one. You cannot opt-out of it unless you stop using all Google products.

Many of us know that Google is not just a web search company. It creates a mobile operating system, is collaborative office software, a Skype competitor, a social network, and a virtual map creator. All of these different products had separate privacy policies, which controlled how much information you wanted to give and to whom. Now, however, Google considers itself one big product, not just a compilation of smaller ones, and is collecting data based on one, company-wide policy.

Google says this will help it provide people with more personally curated results in search, advertisements, spell-check, adding contacts to calendars and more. Recently, the company introduced its new Search Plus Your World, which gave a sneak peak at how Google might use data it acquires from you on different products. Search Plus Your World takes Google+ data, Google social network, and integrates it into search results on the regular Google search website. You see photos Google+ friends have uploaded, posts and people that are relevant to your search. This brought up recent anti-trust accusations as social competitors such as Twitter complained that their results were not also included.

What may stir some is the inability to opt-out of this sharing of data across Google’s products. Google specifically says at the end of its blog post announcing the policy changes that it upholds “data liberation,” and says “if you want to take your information elsewhere you can.”

The change will officially take effect on March 1st. You can login to http://www.google.com/dashboard to see most of the data Google has accumulated on you. It does not include everything, however, such as server logs, cookies and advertising data.

We are looking further into the privacy policy and will update you as we find out more.

The open-source extension, Facebook Friend Exporter, lets users grab all the information about their Facebook friends, which can then be imported to other networks such as Google’s new social service, Google+.

The practice of exporting contact information explicitly violates Facebook’s terms of service, as CNET notes. The official TOS states: “you will not collect users’ content or information, or otherwise access Facebook, using automated means without our permission.”

The extension’s developer, Mohamed Mansour, seems to acknowledge this in his description on the extension’s homepage:

Get your data contact out of Facebook, whether they want you to or not. You gave them your friends and allowed them to store that data, and you have right to take it back out! Facebook doesn’t own my friends…

Mansour also notes that Facebook is blocking his extension and is pledging to build a new version that continues allowing users to download their information.

“Facebook is trying so hard to not allow you to export your friends. They started to remove emails of your friends from your profile by today July 5th 2011. It will no longer work for many people,” Mansour writes. “A new version with a different design is currently deploying. You might have to do exports daily. It uses a different approach, and I will maintain this version. Just bear with me.”

It’s worth noting that the extension has been allowed to exist for quite a while. The first version was released in November 2010, but it’s only recently gained in popularity — picking up more than 17,000 users so far.

It’s interesting that Facebook has taken steps to block such contact exporting efforts just as Google+ is making a name for itself. Clearly, Facebook doesn’t like that Google+ beta users are looking for ways to port over all their Facebook friends to Google+.

But while Facebook might be scared of Google+’s rising popularity, it’s unlikely that the demise of the world’s largest social network will come any time soon. Facebook has an estimated 750,000 active monthly users and a large third-party developer community.

Via CNET