Facebook facelift faces tough fight

The following was posted by  Priyanka Joshi / Mumbai on Sep 26, 2011

Last week, 29-year-old K Dasaratha Rao, a website developer and software consultant from Bangalore, saw several new features being added to the social networking site Facebook

 “Honestly, I didn’t take to the changes immediately. But as I spent time on the site and saw what Facebook had done, I realised that it had actually simplified the number of clicks I would make on the home page.”

What made sense for Rao is that the new FB interface automatically grouped his over 450 friends in convenient lists, made it easier for him to see the popular FB updates by close friends as top stories and even added a button that allowed him to subscribe to international web developers, who do not know him but can share insights on technology.

But Rao’s enthusiasm seems to be an exception when you hear avid Facebook users like New Delhi-based beauty and wellness consultant Ritika Sharma, 27. “What was wrong with the old Facebook that it is now being constantly redesigned. The new features make my FB page too complicated,” she says.

Her colleague, Bhawna Misao, a receptionist, too had similar views. “Since online Facebook has changed so much, I have started using the Facebook app on my BlackBerry, which is still a reflection of the old interface.”

 New features on FB have also failed to impress 20-year-old Miranda House student, Rachna Punjabi who sys: “Recent features like Facebook’s real-time “ticker” stream that alerts me about what my friends read, watch and listen to or tag, is dizzying real time and way too much social sharing.” This also prompted Punjabi to tweak her FB settings that allowed limited sharing of what she does on the social networking portal.

With nearly 36 million users from India (according to September statistics from Socialbakers), Facebook was accessed by more than 45 per cent of India’s internet users. Mark Zuckerberg, CEO and founder of Facebook, should be closely listening to Indian users because the site witnessed a heady growth of about 27 per cent in the last three months, adding over seven milion users.

And FB is not done with the changes yet. At last week’s f8, Facebook’s annual developers conference in San Francisco, Zuckerberg announced the company’s intent to overhaul the profile page on FB for a new feature called Timeline and revealed plans to encourage people to use Facebook as a media-consumption platform.

Sam Lessin, a product manager at Facebook wrote in an official blog: “The way your profile works today, 99 per cent of the stories you share vanish. The only way to find the posts that matter is to click ‘Older Posts’ at the bottom of the page. Again. And again.” With Timeline, FB will curate a home for all stories users share, will be wider than the existing profile, and a lot more visual.

Part of FB’s hurry to evolve as the social network for the masses across the globe is partly due to the heat it is facing from the three-month-old social network site, Google Plus. The new kid on the block from Google’s stable aims to take some of Facebook’s shine off with its own set of social features and forthcoming integration with the search giant’s various online products expected to be launched.

For now, however, it looks like Facebook still enjoys the users’ confidence. According to Informate Mobile Intelligence, Facebook has outpaced Google Plus in terms of share of page views. While share of page views for Google.com declined by 36 per cent over the last six months, the share of Facebook.com saw an increase of 68 per cent.

Users, like Vinit Udeshi, a music jockey in Kolkata, hailed Facebook for launching a standalone messaging and chat app for iPhone and Android devices. “This app allows you to send text messages to anyone in your phone’s contact list as well as your Facebook friends. You can see the messages from the Messenger app as well as your web-based version of Facebook.” The site has also introduced a free 90-day access on mobile devices as part of its tie-ups with telecom operators, including Reliance, Aircel and Airtel in India.

Today, Facebook India is hoarded with over 17 million users in the age group of 18-24 years, followed by the users in the age of 25-34, reveals Socialbakers’ data. Now, Google Plus too is targeting the same user group.

WHAT’S NEW 0N FACEBOOK

The site has overhauled its page design. The new “Top Stories” feature shows a mix of the most popular news stories, according to Facebook’s algorithm, along with the most current status updates. The news feed is meant to act like a user’s social newspaper.

With images being an integral part of most social-networking activity, Facebook will soon roll out “Timeline” that will be best described as a visual representation of your entire life as shared on Facebook. Timeline will allow users to scroll through maps of where you’ve been, pictures, comments, apps, activities shared and so on. Facebook intends to allow users to curate “the story of who you are,” highlighting important photos, events, apps and more

News apps like Digg, Guardian, Yahoo, Wetpaint and The Economist, among others will be available

There will be several music, radio and video-sharing applications on facebook but whether users can stream in India remains to be seen

Friend Lists were revamped making it easier to segment people in lists and a new Smart Lists feature that automatically categorises connections based on common interests, locations and place of work

Facebook has also started grouping status updates about similar topics

For users who have been using the site for a while, it will now show your old status updates from the same day as you browse photo albums

Social media experts like Hareesh Tibrewala, joint CEO, Social Wavelength, says: “Google Plus is still too much in the nascent stage but Google has the power of its search and email. It should be able to grow about 50 per cent or so in the next 12 months.” Google Plus already has over three million users from India although it’s not exactly a happy user base.

WHAT’S NEW 0N GOOGLE PLUS

Hangouts On Air is a feature that lets users broadcast and record their sessions. When a user is “on air,” up to nine others can join the Hangout session and anyone (even those not in the user’s network) can tune in to the live broadcast. To encourage additional information-sharing via Hangouts, Google has added screen-sharing, sketchpad for group doodlingand the ability to create Google Docs from Hangouts. These features can be accessed by clicking the “Try Hangouts with extras” button on your Google Plus page

Google Plus on Android devices will support Hangout video-chats. For starters, users must have a front-facing camera that has Android 2.3 Gingerbread or a higher version

 Google will allow app developers to build applications on the new Hangouts platform

Google Plus mobile app includes better SMS support, allowing users in the US and India to post messages on Google Plus, receive notifications and respond to group messages. Indian users need to get their phone numbers verified on Google Plus and then can send texts to 9222222222 to share information on the move

 A direct challenge to Facebook’s game ecosystem, Google Plus launched its own game apps

Users who use Google Books canshare their books on Google Plus, adding a social experience into the Google Books project

Saurabh Rathore, partner at Moe’s Art, says: “Google Plus interface is boring and Facebook is trying to get more and more complicated. Twitter seems to be the best bet for me. It’s a place where I can control whom I want to follow.”

However, he quickly adds that Facebook still gets a higher rating than Google Plus “because it’s an older platform hence more friends and more conversations. Plus has graveyard-at-midnight kind of silence. When I am happy, I’m on Facebook, when I have to rant, I go to Twitter. Google Plus is my fifth option, after Linkedin and Foursquare.”

Google is listening. Its social search is now integrating Google Plus posts into its search engine results pages for those who log in to their Google account for a personalised search experience. “That means content that your Google Plus contacts have shared will enhance your search experience,” says Adhvith Dhuddu of Alive Now, a social media management firm.

The biggest improvement to Google Plus is via Hangouts - the popular group web conferencing application that lets up to 10 users share a browser-based video chat session. Hangouts On Air is a hangout that lets users broadcast and record their session. When a user is “on air”, up to nine other people can join the Hangout, though anyone can tune in to the live broadcast.

The move may pique interest among Android device users, estimated to be 10 per cent of India’s mobile handset base. Vic Gunhotra, senior vice president of engineering, Google wrote in his blog: “Hangouts currently supports Android 2.3+ devices with front-facing cameras (and iOS support is coming soon). The new mobile app is rolling out to Android Market today [20 September], so you can start hanging out at any time, from just about anywhere.”

Social media expert Rajiv Dingra, founder and CEO of social media agency WatBlog, says: “I don’t believe Google Plus was meant to be a Facebook challenger as much as it was meant to be a more controlled forum for highly-focused content. The design of Plus favours interaction within groups and is not about posting trivial comments.”

His sentiments are echoed by 32-year-old Jayaraman, a chemical engineer based in UAE. “I think Google Plus made itself better after the latest improvements. Facebook has nearly ruined its news feed. I now spend a few minutes every day unmarking updates as “top stories”. I do not want to see “top stories” when I go to my Facebook news feed, especially when Facebook has no idea what I think is important or interesting.”

It is perhaps worth pointing out that Google co-founder and CEO Larry Page himself hasn’t made any public postings on his Google Plus page in more than a month.

Repressing the Internet, Western-Style

Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
— Thomas Jefferson

As politicians call for more online controls after London and Norway, authoritarian states are watching By EVGENY MOROZOV posted  in the Wall Street Journal August 13th

Technology has empowered all sides in the London skirmish: the rioters, the vigilantes and the government.

Did the youthful rioters who roamed the streets of London, Manchester and other British cities expect to see their photos scrutinized by angry Internet users, keen to identify the miscreants? In the immediate aftermath of the riots, many cyber-vigilantes turned to Facebook, Flickr and other social networking sites to study pictures of the violence. Some computer-savvy members even volunteered to automate the process by using software to compare rioters' faces with faces pictured elsewhere on the Internet.

The rioting youths were not exactly Luddites either. They used BlackBerrys to send their messages, avoiding more visible platforms like Facebook and Twitter. It's telling that they looted many stores selling fancy electronics. The path is short, it would seem, from "digital natives" to "digital restives."
Technology has empowered all sides in this skirmish: the rioters, the vigilantes, the government and even the ordinary citizens eager to help. But it has empowered all of them to different degrees. As the British police, armed with the latest facial-recognition technology, go through the footage captured by their numerous closed-circuit TV cameras and study chat transcripts and geolocation data, they are likely to identify many of the culprits.

Authoritarian states are monitoring these developments closely. Chinese state media, for one, blamed the riots on a lack of Chinese-style controls over social media. Such regimes are eager to see what kind of precedents will be set by Western officials as they wrestle with these evolving technologies. They hope for at least partial vindication of their own repressive policies.

Some British politicians quickly called on the BlackBerry maker Research in Motion to suspend its messaging service to avoid an escalation of the riots. On Thursday, Prime Minister David Cameron said that the government should consider blocking access to social media for people who plot violence or disorder.

After the recent massacre in Norway, many European politicians voiced their concern that anonymous anti-immigrant comments on the Web were inciting extremism. They are now debating ways to limit online anonymity.

Does the Internet really need an overhaul of norms, laws and technologies that gives more control to governments? When the Egyptian secret police can purchase Western technology that allows them to eavesdrop on the Skype calls of dissidents, it seems unlikely that American and European intelligence agencies have no means of listening the calls of, say, a loner in Norway.

We tolerate such drastic proposals only because acts of terror briefly deprive us of the ability to think straight. We are also distracted by the universal tendency to imagine technology as a liberating force; it keeps us from noticing that governments already have more power than is healthy.

The domestic challenges posed by the Internet demand a measured, cautious response in the West. Leaders in Beijing, Tehran and elsewhere are awaiting our wrong-headed moves, which would allow them to claim an international license for dealing with their own protests. The yare also looking for tools and strategies that might improve their own digital surveillance.

After violent riots in 2009, Chinese officials had no qualms about cutting off the Xinjiang region's Internet access for 10 months. Still, they would surely welcome a formal excuse for such drastic measures if the West should decide to take similar measures in dealing with disorder. Likewise, any plan in the U.S. or Europe to engage in online behavioral profiling—trying to identify future terrorists based on their tweets, gaming habits or social networking activity—is likely to boost the already booming data-mining industry. It would not take long for such tools to find their way to repressive states.

But something even more important is at stake here. To the rest of the world, the efforts of Western nations, and especially the U.S., to promote democracy abroad have often smacked of hypocrisy. How could the West lecture others while struggling to cope with its own internal social contradictions? Other countries could live with this hypocrisy as long as the West held firm in promoting its ideals abroad. But this double game is harder to maintain in the Internet era.

In their concern to stop not just mob violence but commercial crimes like piracy and file-sharing, Western politicians have proposed new tools for examining Web traffic and changes in the basic architecture of the Internet to simplify surveillance. What they fail to see is that such measures can also affect the fate of dissidents in places like China and Iran. Likewise, how European politicians handle online anonymity will influence the policies of sites like Facebook, which, in turn, will affect the political behavior of those who use social media in the Middle East.

Should America and Europe abandon any pretense of even wanting to promote democracy abroad? Or should they try to figure out how to increase the resilience of their political institutions in the face of the Internet? As much as our leaders might congratulate themselves for embracing the revolutionary potential of these new technologies, they have shown little evidence of being able to think about them in a nuanced and principled way.
—Mr. Morozov is a visiting scholar at Stanford University and the author of "The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom."

Writing for the Internet

While many writers are eager to write for the Internet, it is important to consider the key differences between writing for a traditional print audience and an Internet audience. Keeping these three points in mind will help you achieve success with your Internet writing ventures.

Writing for the Internet is different from traditional publishing formats in three essential ways:

• Audience
• Format
• Lifespan

It is important to consider each difference while writing.

While audience is always a key consideration for any writer audience consideration is a primary factor for Internet writers. While the basic considerations of audience (who do you expect to be your primary reading audience?) remain the same there are some important differences.

First, it is important to remember that in traditional publications your audience is somewhat captive. Once they have actually picked up or purchased a print media they are likely to at least give it a few pages before ditching it. However, on the Internet the audience can move away from your words with a click of the button so you need to be focused and on target. You can't take time for a slow buildup or meandering discussion. If you (the writer) do not seem to be delivering the goods then the reader will simply move on. This does not mean you need to cater to the lowest denominator but it does mean that you need to know your audience as well as how to respond to that audience's needs and desires.

Another important point is that many Internet readers scan documents quickly before committing themselves to reading. It is important to write clearly and concisely as well as use punchy headlines and subheadings as well as catchy introductions and conclusions as these are key points for scanning.

While at first glance Internet documents appear to mimic traditional print documents there are many major differences. One of the most important is the entry point. A search engine may deliver readers to some point in the middle or end of your document. If you have written a coherent and cohesive piece then those readers may well move back to the beginning to read properly. In response to this, and the scanning readers mentioned above, it is best to break longer documents into several stand-alone pieces that can work together as a whole or as separate documents if approached in that manner.

Finally, an important difference between traditional publications and Internet publications is lifespan. While the apparent lifespan of many electronic documents appears to be fleeting that is not in fact true. Newspaper and magazine articles in print publications may only be current for a day, week or month but be archived on the Internet. Internet publications are frequently archived on the Internet for years. So while it is important as a writer to be fresh and current also keep in mind that your reader may access your words at some undetermined point in the future.

Keeping these three key points -- audience, format, and lifespan -- in mind when writing for the Internet will help you achieve greater writing success.

Chili Cook-Off some off beat humour to brighten the day

If you put tomfoolery into a computer, nothing comes out of it but tomfoolery. But this tomfoolery, having passed through a very expensive machine, is somehow ennobled and no-one dares criticize it.- Pierre Gallois

I received the following from a friend of mine via email, don't know if any of it is true, but it is very funny, so I thought we could some humour today.

Chili Cook-Off

If you can read this whole story without laughing, then there's no hope for you. I was crying by the end. This is an actual account as relayed to paramedics at a chili cook-off in Texas .

Note: Please take time to read this slowly. If you pay attention to the first two judges, the reaction of the third judge is even better. For those of you who have lived in Texas , you know how true this is. They actually have a Chili Cook-off about the time Halloween comes around. It takes up a major portion of a parking lot at the San Antonio City Park . Judge #3 was an inexperienced Chili taster named Frank, who was visiting from Springfield , IL .


Frank: "Recently, I was honored to be selected as a judge at a chili cook-off. The original person called in sick at the last moment and I happened to be standing there at the judge's table, asking for directions to the Coors Light truck, when the call came in. I was assured by the other two judges (Native Texans) that the chili wouldn't be all that spicy; and, besides, they told me I could have free beer! during the tasting, so I accepted and became Judge 3."

Here are the scorecard notes from the event:

CHILI # 1 - MIKE'S MANIAC MONSTER CHILI

Judge # 1 -- A little too heavy on the tomato. Amusing kick.
Judge # 2 -- Nice, smooth tomato flavor. Very mild.
Judge # 3 (Frank) -- Holy crap, what the hell is this stuff? You could remove dried paint from your driveway. Took me two beers to put the flames out. I hope that's the worst one. These Texans are crazy.

CHILI # 2 - AUSTIN 'S AFTERBURNER CHILI

Judge # 1 -- Smoky, with a hint of pork. Slight jalapeno tang.
Judge # 2 -- Exciting BBQ flavor, needs more peppers to be taken seriously.
Judge # 3 -- Keep this out of the reach of children. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to taste besides pain. I had to wave off two people who wanted to give me the Heimlich maneuver. They had to rush in more beer when they saw the look on my face.

CHILI # 3 - FRED'S FAMOUS BURN DOWN THE BARN CHILI

Judge # 1 -- Excellent firehouse chili. Great kick.
Judge # 2 -- A bit salty, good use of peppers.
Judge # 3 -- Call the EPA. I've located a uranium spill. My nose feels like I have been snorting Drano. Everyone knows the routine by now. Get me more beer before I ignite. The barmaid pounded me on the back, now my backbone is in the front part of my chest. I'm getting sh*t-faced from all of the beer.

CHILI # 4 - BUBBA'S BLACK MAGIC

Judge # 1 -- Black bean chili with almost no spice. Disappointing.
Judge # 2 -- Hint of lime in the black beans. Good side dish for fish or other mild foods, not much of a chili.
Judge # 3 -- I felt something scraping across my tongue, but was unable to taste it. Is it possible to burn out taste buds? Sally, the beer maid, was standing behind me with fresh refills. This 300 lb. woman is starting to look HOT ... just like this nuclear waste I'm eating! Is chili an aphrodisiac?

CHILI # 5 - LISA'S LEGAL LIP REMOVER

Judge # 1 -- Meaty, strong chili. Cayenne peppers freshly ground, adding considerable kick. Very impressive.
Judge # 2 -- Chili using shredded beef, could use more tomato. Must admit the cayenne peppers make a strong statement.
Judge # 3 -- My ears are ringing, sweat is pouring off my forehead and I can no longer focus my eyes. I farted, and four people behind me needed paramedics. The contestant seemed offended when I told her that her chili had given me brain damage. Sally saved my tongue from bleeding by pouring beer directly on it from the pitcher. I wonder if I'm burning my lips off! It really ticks me off that the other judges asked me to stop screaming. Screw them.

CHILI # 6 - VERA'S VERY VEGETARIAN VARIETY

Judge # 1 -- Thin yet bold vegetarian variety chili. Good balance of spices and peppers.
Judge # 2 -- The best yet. Aggressive use of peppers, onions, garlic. Superb.
Judge # 3 -- My intestines are now a straight pipe filled with gaseous, sulfuric flames. I crapped on myself when I farted, and I'm worried it will eat through the chair. No one seems inclined to stand behind me except that Sally. Can't feel my lips anymore. I need to wipe my butt with a snow cone.

CHILI # 7 - SUSAN'S SCREAMING SENSATION CHILI

Judge # 1 -- A mediocre chili with too much reliance on canned peppers.
Judge # 2 -- Ho hum, tastes as if the chef literally threw in a can of chili peppers at the last moment. **I should take note that I am worried about judge number 3. He appears to be in a bit of distress as he is cursing uncontrollably.
Judge # 3 -- You could put a grenade in my mouth, pull the pin, and I wouldn't feel a thing. I've lost sight in one eye, and the world sounds like it is made of rushing water. My shirt is covered with chili, which slid unnoticed out of my mouth. My pants are full of lava to match my shirt. At least during the autopsy, they'll know what killed me. I've decided to stop breathing. It's too painful. Screw it; I'm not getting any oxygen anyway. If I need air, I'll just suck it in through the 4-inch hole in my stomach.

CHILI # 8 - BIG TOM'S TOENAIL CURLING CHILI

Judge # 1 -- The perfect ending, this is a nice blend chili. Not too bold but spicy enough to declare its existence.
Judge # 2 -- This final entry is a good, balanced chili. Neither mild nor hot. Sorry to see that most of it was lost when Judge #3 farted, passed out, fell over and pulled the chili pot down on top of himself. Not sure if he's going to make it. Poor feller, wonder how he'd have reacted to really hot chili?

Judge # 3 - No Report