Ars Technica Has Been Acquired

I've been a fan of Ars Technica since I started studying IT and Privacy Law. The website has some excellent in-depth articles on current legal tech issues, as well as some really in-depth technical articles. I always learn something new when I visit the website, or gain a deeper understanding of something I already know.

There were a few moments when I caught myself wondering how Ars Technica can stay independent. It's a treasure trove of information, who wouldn't want to acquire it? But there was solace in the fact that it was independent, free from the corporate media tentacles that have acquired a taste for sucking the life out of free speech. There seems to be an agenda, and it is sold to the highest bidder.

So imagine my surprise when I saw this article on TechCrunch discussing the acquition of Ars Technica by Conde Nast/Wired. When the shock passed, and I read the post, it does make some sense. I've always thought Ars Technica the more...how should I put it...smarter version of Wired. Nothing against Wired, I read that too, there was just something more inviting, less busy, about Ars Technica. I'd read it first before Wired.

It's too early to do anything more than speculate, and speculating wouldn't do Ars Technica, or Conde Nast, justice. It will be interesting to see, however, what happens. It's possible there is now more fuel to add to the argument of media no longer being independent, even with the advent of the Internet.

But who knows. Perhaps Ars Technica will remain as is, just with deeper pockets which will allow it to improve and expand its offerings. So where do I send in my application for employment?

ZoHo Just Gets Better

I was browsing TechCrunch this morning, and came across this post about ZoHo now letting you login with your Google or Yahoo ID. That's awesome!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, ZoHo is a better suite of online apps than Google Docs. ZoHo is more feature rich, and it continues to demonstrate that it can use others APIs and applications more efficiently than companies than create them. ZoHo beat Google at its own game by using Google Gears to bring offline capability to its products before Google Docs. Now it is using other Google APIs and Yahoo APIs to make the process of logging in easier, and my guess is this only the start.

Perhaps ZoHo has improved its email feature now, too. The nice thing about Google Docs was that I could email my paper in Word to any email address. With ZoHo, I could only email it to myself, which then meant I had to forward that email to a professor; an extra step that made using Google Docs more worthwhile.

OK. Must go try logging in to ZoHo with using my Google account.

Another Take on Data Portability: Job Apps

I never really paid much attention to the noise of data portability, I kind of like having my information in separate places, even if it is redundant information. But at least if one is compromised, the whole pyramid doesn't collapse. Reminds me of that eBay account comprise post. But now that I've put out roughly 100 job apps, and had to type the same information roughly 100 times, I'm starting to rethink this whole concept of data portability.

Sure, it seems to apply mostly to social networks, and it's hard to think of good reasons regular people should care as this Social Web post explores, but for the 350,000 people like me who suddenly find themselves unemployed, data portability starts to make some sense.

Job applications, regardless of whether filled out in paper form or online, all require the same information. And, if you pay attention to the small number of companies that are used, like Brass Ring, you would think people would catch on. Instead of having to enter your information repeatedly for each job at a different employer that uses Brass Ring, or some such company, why not be able to enter your information once, and if it meets criteria, send an alert to the respective HR person.

This is basically a half baked idea in my head at the moment, but I'm convinced there is a better way to send out job applications, a better way to fill out what amounts to the same form, regardless of employer. You'd think, by now, Brass Ring would be able to fill in my information for me. About the only thing that varies is the cover letter.

I'm finding it difficult to grasp that in this age of "automization," no one has figured out how to automate the job application process. There really must be a better way, and perhaps data portability is a way, or a means to a better way.

Perhaps after about 100 applications, this will become a more concrete, coherent thought.

Plenty of Time to Ponder

OK. So it has been a few months since my last post. Working full time and going to grad school part time really does eat into one's, well, time.

But, due to circumstances beyond my control, I now have plenty of time on my hands, and time to sit and ponder. There is quite a bit to consider. Take, for example, this TechCrunch article showing that people spend most of their computer time using Microsoft products. Not really a big surprise there, but what is interesting are things that are missing, and things I used (and use even more now) every day.

Meebo, for example. It's a pretty nifty online application that lets you manage all of your instant messaging clients right from a Web browser. I have friends you use AIM, others who use YIM, GTalk and even ICQ. Since downloading any of those apps would violate company policy (while on a company laptop), Meebo made it possible for me to communicate and without violating company policy. I'm such a fan, I use it on my own laptop as well. Now if only there was a mobile version...

And it seems as if communication tools beat out all others in the battle for time. From a business perspective, this makes sense. Business is communication, and in this tech-driven age with remote offices and telecommuters, communication tools are even more essential. I, for one, am a bigger fan of chat and email than phone calls. It's easier to multi-task when communicating via chat or email.

In other news...Facebook and 49 states (Texas being the only hold out) struck a safety and privacy deal, according to TechCrunch. That will be very interesting to watch. Firing of associates is big news over on the WSJ's Law Blog, which is an enjoyable blog, as is the WSJ's BizTech blog. They are waging a small war over tech jargon. Just goes to show how writers are starting to forget that search engines are not the primary audience, and that the semantic Web does, indeed, exist. Simplicity of language is still the best route, so best of luck to the BizTech blog and it's fight against tech jargon, or mumbo-jumbo.

And how can anyone forget the recent dissolution of the Microsoft-Yahoo deal, dubbed MicroHoo. I still don't know what to think about Yahoo outsourcing its search advertising to Google. Anti-trust implications, possibly. Helpful to Yahoo but hurtful to the search market, possibly. Is Microsoft finished? Certainly not. It does need to improve its Office Live application as it is not nearly as easy or intuitive as Google Docs or ZoHo. Personally, I think ZoHo is one of the best kept secrets on the Web.

Big Think: The Best Combination of New Technology?

I was browsing the New York Times this morning and came across this article about Big Think, a "YouTube for ideas," the article states.

The tag line on Big Think is "We are what you think," not "WE are what WE think," but "WE are what YOU think." Interesting phrasing.

The concept seems to combine the best features of the latest technology from sites like YouTube and Digg. You can post multimedia opinions and comments, or just text, and rate other peoples opinions. "Welcome to the conversation" indeed.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and who from the common people, the masses, if you will, posts to Big Think. Will people embrace such an open concept usually reserved for discussion groups in college as much as they have embraced the absurdity of every day life on YouTube?

More ruminations to follow....

BigString: No More Sender Regret

I saw the founder and CEO of BigString on CNBC's "The Big Idea" and thought, hey, awesome.

It's an email service, with a twist. Not only can you send and receive email, but you can also send "self-destruct" email, which is Mission:Impossible style email as they describe it on the website, recallable/erasable email and a variety of other means, including video email.

There have been numerous instances of emails being sent on the fly, causing mischief and mayhem as the contents were, well, less than civil. Emails fired off in the heat of the moment instead of taking a few to chill. And email sits out in the ether of the Web, stored somewhere and never really erased. There's always the possibility, however remote, that a particular email will come back to haunt you.

BigString, therefore, is on to something. The ability to make a troublesome email go poof is enticing, and removes any incentive to think before you type.

Too bad Enron didn't have such a service at its disposal, though it seems as if the White House does since emails are still, ahem, missing.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how BigString and its email elimination business does. No doubt there is a market for it. And who knows what could be next. Now that people are understanding that the Web is public domain, plenty want information removed and have discovered that it is not quite that easy; information is never completely removed.

Perhaps this will lead to a solution, and more privacy and ethical battles are sure to ensue.

Why a Search Engine Company Needs to Fix LexisNexis

Most of us, at this point, especially people my age and younger, take searching on the Internet for granted. We've grown up with the technology, we have little issue with freely posting information (damning or not) for the world to see and generally assumed that if we type in keywords into a box, we'll get the results we want.

If you go to law school, you'll be given access to the well-known legal research tool called Lexis-Nexis, which will remain your archaic friend for as long as you pursue a legal career. And within your first few minutes of training, you'll discover that Lexis-Nexis is a horrible search tool by today's technology standards. You have to memorize a list of archaic commands, commands that used to be second nature when you had to use the library computer to figure out where on particular book was located in the millions of stacks. But, you have to string the commands together just right in order to get the result you want, which takes practice and lots of trial and error. And that is assuming you have started your search in the correct category.

Needless to say, finding anything in Lexis-Nexis is a time-consuming, tedious task. But as it is the definitive research tool used by the legal profession, using it is a necessity. And since technology permeates so much of the world today, and as the legal staffs of technology companies continue to expand, I am surprised that none of them, not even search engine companies, have done anything to improve the search capabilities of Lexis-Nexis.

If you think about it, Lexis-Nexis is a treasure trove of information. Any case from anytime, anywhere, is in Lexis-Nexis. Legal definitions. Statues. Ordinances. Any legal document at all, can be found in Lexis-Nexis. Now isn't that a database worth creating useful search algorithms? Think of the hours (as in $$) that would be saved by legal departments and law students everywhere if Lexis-Nexis had the search smarts of Google, Yahoo or even MSN behind it, not to mention how much more 21st Century Lexis-Nexis would be.

Everyone is on the hunt to organize information, which usually involves trying to talk various groups of people into sharing information so it can be compiled and indexed in one spot. Why not start in an area that already has the information complied and indexed, and improve the indexing process? What good is a wealth of information in one place if you can't easily find anything?