HISTORY MADE: SCOTUS UPHOLDS OBAMACARE

I was taught never to bury the lead. So without further ado:

And now; Romney’s reaction.

Watching this unfold internally was amazing.

SCOTUSblog was really the first to break the news correctly. The biggest decision since Bush V. Gore, and similarly, major news networks (I’m looking at you CNN, and FOX news) jumped the gun. Let Roberts read past the first page of the opinion before displaying misinformation as breaking news. 

Perhaps nobody had more fun reporting on the day’s chaos than The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart.

Chief Justice Roberts the swing vote? Nobody saw that one coming. Romney is regretting his pledge to nominate justices “in the mold” of John Roberts right now. Conservatives are in such disbelief over the supposed betrayal there’s already a movement calling for his impeachment

If today doesn’t provide you with a stark enough contrast for who you want leading our country come November, nothing will. 

TBTL RESPONDS TO MY LETTER ON EPISODE #1056

So the other day when I wrote my open letter to Luke Burbank about Neil Hamburger, I received a very comical and sobering reply about the reality of his persona. Today on Episode #1056 “Secrets Revealed”, Luke read the e-mail on air and was kind enough not to call me out by name. I was more surprised than anything else that he chose to read it. But I can tell you that I thank him and Andrew for being so good-natured about the whole thing. Thank you, Luke and Andrew for giving me my moment of TBTL immortality.

FACEBOOK FACIAL RECOGNITION FEATURE CREATES UPROAR, REIGNITES PRIVACY DEBATE

Article first published as Facebook Facial Recognition Feature Creates Uproar, Reignites Privacy Debate on Technorati.

In his 1983 standup special Himself, comedic legend Bill Cosby talks about children and his belief that all of them must suffer from brain damage. “If you know you’re not supposed to do something and then you do it and people say, ‘Why did you do it?’ And you say, 'I don’t know’ [that’s] brain damage,” says Cosby.

Today, we discover yet another child with apparent brain damage; Facebook. The seven-year-old social network finds itself in the midst of yet another privacy debate, this time over its worldwide roll-out of facial recognition technologies with users’ Facebook photos.

The new feature, which has been available in the United States since December, allows users to upload photos to their accounts and have the site make suggestions for whom among a user’s friends should be tagged based on other photos currently on the site. As with all new features introduced by Facebook, it’s automatically turned on in users’ privacy settings and requires users to manually opt-out if desired.

Cue the upheaval.

As Geoffrey Fowler points out in today’s Wallstreet Journalthe technology reignites a longstanding debate among privacy advocates who argue that new features like this one should be opt-in and require user consent before being activated, not the other way around.

“Our concern, as usual, is that Facebook is making changes to its privacy and creating new features without giving people sufficient notice and giving them a choice as to whether they want to participate,” said Chris Conley, of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California.  

Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA) agreed. In a statement posted to his website Wednesday, Markey wrote:

“If this new feature is as useful as Facebook claims, it should be able to stand on its own, without an automatic sign-up that changes users’ privacy settings without their permission.”

Facebook CEO Mark Zukerberg has historically defended such practices arguing that requiring users to opt-in to each new feature would diminish their Facebook experience. In a statement released today on their blog, the company admitted they should have been more clear explaining the feature to users in an effort to avoid confusion and that they are working to “satisfy concerns” brought forward by lawmakers and privacy advocates. The statement also touts the feature as a time saver for the more than 100 million photos tagged by Facebook users on a daily basis.

While Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes contends that the company has received “almost no user complaints” about the facial recognition feature, he mistakenly equates that lack of complaint with the belief that “people are enjoying the feature and finding it useful.” How can someone be expected to complain about something when they aren’t even aware of its existence? Making users aware of new features and their implications after they’ve gone live should be one of Facebook’s top priorities. Consider it one of my top suggestions to improve Facebook.

Instructions for disabling the facial recognition feature can be found here.

Anyone seen any tagged photos on Facebook of Rep. Anthony Weiner?

APPLE’S ‘LOCATIONGATE’ 2011 TO BE INVESTIGATED BY CONGRESS

Article first published as Apple’s ‘Locationgate’ 2011 To Be Investigated By Congress on Technorati.

Apple certainly has had its hands full lately. Earnings for the tech giant have skyrocketed, in large part thanks to the success of the iPhone, which now accounts for 50% of the company’s revenue. In addition, Apple is just now balancing the supply and demand of the widely popular iPad 2, and the iPhone 5 is expected to begin shipping in September. Nevermind the fact that Apple is now embroiled in a legal battle with Samsung–the very company that supplies some crucial iPhone components–over patent infringement. Oh yeah, and as it turns out, with as busy as Apple appears to be, they’ve been tracking the moves of iPhone users everywhere, according to reports. They were just hoping that maybe nobody would notice.

Last week when reports surfaced that the iPhone contained a hidden file that tracked user location, the tech world erupted in anger. So much so that the scandal–now dubbed “Locationgate”–prompted action from Minnesota Senator Al Franken, who sent a letter to Apple CEO Steve Jobs demanding answers about the nature of the location tracking and why users were never made aware of its existence. On Monday, Franken, Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law, announced the subcommittee’s first hearing, titled “Protecting Mobile Privacy: Your Smartphones, Tablets, Cell Phones and Your Privacy” on Tuesday, May 10, 2011 at 10:00 a.m.

Franken has summoned members from both Apple and Google to appear at the hearing, as well as witnesses from the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. In addition, Ashkan Soltani, independent privacy researcher and consultant; and Justin Brookman, Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology’s Project on Consumer Privacy are expected to testify.

The hearing is the first congressional investigation of its kind into the implications of location tracking for consumers and manufactures alike. The question that remains to be answered is whether or not Apple and Google, makers of two of the most widely used mobile platforms are in violation of any consumer privacy laws.

Wired broke the story late Monday that two Apple customers filed a lawsuit after learning of the location tracking. The suit filled on April 22, 2011 in federal court in Tampa, Florida cites concerns over privacy and alleges a violation of The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by unlawfully collecting a user’s location data without consent. Apple claims that the location data collected is anonymous and not linked to specific users. iPhone users who don’t want their location tracked have two options: Jailbreak the device to install a third party application that removes the file from the phone, or ditch the handset in favor of another. Unfortunately, turning off the location settings on the iPhone itself does not prevent the handset from storing or transmitting such data.

Jobs, despite being on medical leave, issued his first statement on the issue Monday, addressing concerns amongst the Apple faithful. When Jobs received an e-mail seeking clarification on the issue, his reply seemed dismissive. “We don’t track anyone. The information circulating is false.” He went on to attack Android amidst claims by the e-mail’s author that that the Google handset was free from tracking mechanisms. “Oh yes they do [track you]” replied Jobs. Not as snarky as his replies are sometimes known to be, but reminiscent certainly of when iPhone 4 “Antennagate” broke and Jobs’ initial reply was simply, “Well, don’t hold it that way.” If history is any guide, Jobs will end up apologizing later pretending like it’s no big deal. Jobs’ reply is the only comment by Apple on the issue to date, which raises the question: where is their PR department? And why have they remained silent on the issue for so long? This late in the game their silence raises more questions than answers.

For their part, Google has defended its practices claiming that all location based data collected by their Android devices requires users to opt-in. According to an April 23, 2011 article published in the Wall Street Journal, a Google spokesman offered the following statement:

”We provide users with notice and control over the collection, sharing and use of location in order to provide a better mobile experience on Android devices.”

As concerns over location tracking grow among smartphone users, it will be worth watching how Apple and Google respond and what information is gleaned from the upcoming congressional hearing. “Antennagate” and “Glassgate” may be events of the past for Apple, but “Locationgate” is just beginning. Stay tuned.

FOUR REASONS THE VERIZON IPHONE LAUNCH FAILED

Article first published as Four Reasons The Verizon iPhone Launch Failed on Technorati.

The battle between AT&T and Verizon has officially begun, but so far it hasn’t been much of a fight.

Thursday marked the long-awaited arrival of the Verizon iPhone. While millions of customers are no doubt happy to see the handset available on another carrier with different monthly plans than those currently offered by AT&T, the introduction of the CDMA iPhone seems anticlimactic. Sure, it’s only been a day, but the public response seems lukewarm at best. A lot of hype and buildup for nothing. What’s behind the phone’s lackluster launch? I’ve got four theories.

1. Timing: Verizon likely wanted the phone to launch around Valentine’s day hoping to capitalize on the consumerism of the holiday driving up sales. The problem is that the iPhone 4 launched almost a year ago. The iPhone’s next incarnation is likely to be introduced in early June and if consumers are going to spend money on a new iPhone, CDMA or GSM, they want the latest and greatest, not a model that’s going to be outdated in less than four months.


2. The Hype: The “If you build it they will come” mentality may have backfired. While it’s no secret that Verizon customers have pleaded for the iPhone again and again, when the official announcement was made, Verizon’s advertising efforts were somewhat nauseating to watch. One campaign spot in particular, thanking Verizon customers for their patience as the clock ticked down to arrival day made me cringe. True, some customers may have been watching the clock, but some weren’t. Nobody likes to think of themselves as being so easily manipulated and persuaded. Then again, the iPhone 4 launch last June caused plenty of chaos, so maybe I’ll just concede that point.

3. The Hassle of The Switch: So, you’ve got AT&T and now you’re thinking of switching to the Verizon iPhone? You could, if you want to deal with potential contract hurdles, early termination fees and the headache that comes with joining a new carrier. The cost-benefit analysis isn’t worth it for most users. AT&T has already revamped its calling and data plans to compete with the Verizon launch. As an added bonus, current AT&T iPhone customers are being enticed to stay with AT&T with the promise of an additional 1000 rollover minutes.

 4. The Competition: The iPhone is one of the most popular handsets, but it isn’t the only one. The openness of the Android platform offers its own advantages over the iPhone and is appealing to many who like to have control over their own handsets. Not to mention that Android hasn’t endured months of bad press. No Antennagateissues with the proximity sensor, or easily shattered glass. And let’s not count out Windows Phone 7 in light of their newly-established partnership with Nokia following the death of the Symbian platform.

What are your thoughts on the Verizon iPhone launch?

A LITTLE BARNES & NOBLE HOLIDAY CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURE

MotleyFool-TMOT-f8458815-bks-store_large.jpg

Article first published as A Little Barnes & Noble Holiday Customer Service Failure on Technorati.

Every consumer’s worst nightmare when calling a customer service number for support is hearing the following: “Due to abnormally high call volume, you may experience longer than usual hold time to reach a representative.” Whenever I hear that I think, “The reason you are experiencing abnormally high call volume is likely because your service or product is infuriating.” 

Everyone has dealt at some point with having to call a company’s customer service number for something. Maybe AT&T has dropped your call for the last time, (ironically many of those dropped calls come while waiting in the queue to talk to an AT&T representative) or you’re a Comcast customer without a connection. Perhaps, as was the case with me, Barnes & Noble’s website was making holiday shopping a little less merry and a lot more stress-inducing.

I admit that the majority of my online shopping is done on Amazon. They’re ranked number one in customer satisfaction according to a recent survey and there’s good reason for that. The process is quick, easy, painless and I believe that their slogan (Amazon, and you’re done) is a true reflection of how user-friendly they make the experience. Should you need help at anytime they have friendly support 24/7 and returns couldn’t possibly be any easier. Plus, they have everything. All of the above have made me a loyal Amazon customer.

However, I had accumulated a few gift-cards to Barnes and Noble throughout the year and opted to take care of some holiday shopping while taking advantage of the savings. Mistake number one.

Many online retailers allow their customers to save their gift-cards into their online account and store them for future use. This is useful if you have more than one but don’t want to spend them simultaneously, or if you want to guard against losing them before they’re spent by keeping them stored online. These practices are a welcome safeguard to consumers in such cases.

Unless you’re dealing with Barnes and Noble.

According to Barnes and Noble, gift-cards that are digitally stored can only be used for the purchase of e-books. That’s great if (a. I want to purchase e-books and b). I have a Nook, which I don’t. So I called B&N customer service to see what they could do. What I got was a lesson in customer service, or rather the lack of it and the absurdity of the Barnes and Noble online shopping experience.

After 20 minutes on hold, I explain my situation to the representative. I am simply trying to apply my gift-cards which are stored and clearly visible within my B&N online account to my order. Her initial response filled me with hope.

B&N Rep: I can help you with this. Go ahead and place the order online. Then under payment options, select “Pay by phone.” Once the order is placed, we can apply the gift-cards to your order.

Me: Great. I’ll go ahead and place the order now.

B&N Rep: Orders take approximately 20 minutes to reach our system. You may want to call us back once your order hits our system. Then we can apply the gift-cards on your account.

Keeping in mind that I have already waited 20 minutes to get to this point, I was flabbergasted by her suggestion that I call back. However, I agree. I’ve already made it this far. Mistake number two.

I endure another 20-minute wait on hold (after waiting the requisite 20 to call back) and retell the story to the next representative I speak with. She informs me that the previous representative misspoke. I’m reminded that per B&N policy, digitally stored gift-cards are eligible for e-book purchases only. Without having the full card number to enter manually at checkout, I’m out of luck.

I plead with her that there must be a solution. She asks if I mind being put on hold while she “investigates.” Before I can even answer, I’m on hold for another 20 minutes. While on hold, I’m hoping someone is listening to my mounting frustration and monitoring my call for “quality assurance purposes” as they claim to do.

Her final solution had me laughing.

B&N Rep: Thank you for your patience. What I can suggest is that you purchase e-books with your gift-cards through our online store, then once they’re ordered, you can call us back, request a refund and then we will then be able to retrieve the full gift-card number for you. Then, you can go ahead and place a new order for the items currently in your cart and use the gift-card toward that order.

Me: Are you kidding?

She wasn’t. Maybe I could have gotten somewhere with a supervisor, but by now I’ve spent well over an hour trying to place my order through B&N and use my gift-cards to save some money only to now be left utterly frustrated. I thanked her for her help, hung up the phone and went to Amazon.

The whole process took under two minutes.

Amazon, and I’m done. Sometimes you don’t know how good a company is until you meet their competition. Thank you, Amazon. I knew there was a reason you ranked #1 in customer satisfaction.

Barnes and Noble will never beat Amazon now matter how hard they try. They may, however, surrender to Borders.

HOW THE FLAWED TSA PROCEDURES AFFECT THE DISABLED

Article first published as How The Flawed TSA Procedures Affect The Disabled on Technorati.

If you like to fly, raise your hand. Go ahead. Think about it. Take your time. I’ll wait.

Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone? Yeah, that’s what I thought.

Sure, if I’m invited to the Royal Wedding next summer, I’ll go. Or, if Sir Paul McCartney wants to invite me over to smoke pot with him and Dana Carvey while explaining how the Beatles were finally able to settle their differences with Apple and come to iTunes, of course I’ll accept the invitation. I mean, it’s Paul McCartney. Those exceptions aside, I hate flying.

Admittedly, as a wheelchair user I do get certain perks at the airport. I’m automatically moved to the front of check-in and security lines, I get to board the plane first to avoid being completely run over by frustrated travelers, who once I’m on the plane sitting comfortably in bulkhead, are pushing and shoving as if their seats will disappear completely, forcing them to stand for the duration of their flight.

Having the fast pass at the nation’s airports and prime seating on the plane is nice, but don’t delude yourself into thinking that I’ve got it made when I travel. Getting on the plane and through security is hardly a seamless process thanks to the agency now dubbed Transportation Sexual Assault by some travelers in light of new security measures. 

Putting the privacy issues and the radiation concerns raised by the new TSA security measures aside, the full body X-ray machines and “enhanced” pat-downs that made Jon Tyner walk out of the airport in San Diego earlier this week in protest are not new to myself or any other disabled passenger for that matter. Most disabled passengers know what they’re in for when they travel. We undergo these enhanced pat-downs each and every time we fly. There is no “random selection” prior to our screenings, and that’s understandable.

After all, we come equipped with our own metal chairs, and because of their varying sizes, they provide lots of real estate to hide potential weapons and other forbidden items. All of these factors make the metal detectors at the airport ineffective and useless security measures, making the full body pat-down a indisputable reality. Unfortunately, despite how nice the TSA agents can be (and more often than not they are), they too are useless and ill-prepared to effectively screen disabled passengers. From my experiences with TSA, screeners don’t undergo nearly as much training as they should when it comes to screening disabled passengers and that doesn’t inspire confidence.

Let me set the scene for you. The process usually goes something like this:

I wheel to the security checkpoint. After checking my ID and boarding pass, I am directed to a designated wait area where I am told a male TSA employee will be along “momentary” to conduct a full body pat-down (and yes that includes a groin check). Sometimes they arrive quickly, sometimes it takes two to three reminders by another TSA employee as they shout that they need a “male assist” to come over. I, meanwhile take delight in humming the Jeopardy theme. Depending on my mood, I’ll either do it out loud or in my head.

When the TSA agent finally comes over, he runs through his practiced script very methodically as he alerts me to how the search will be conducted. He asks about sensitive areas on my body before telling me when to lean forward, backward, sideways, essentially every direction possible to ensure every inch of me has been searched. I stretch my arms, move my legs and half expect that he’ll soon ask me to juggle three balls in the air with one hand and wheel with the other. He checks both me and my chair for prohibited items, finding nothing out of the ordinary. Then he again asks if he should be made aware of sensitive areas just prior to using the back of his hands to do the groin check. Yup. I have a groin. Check. Then he stops, and looks at me puzzled like he’s forgotten his own name.

What he’s really forgotten is the protocol which he recited to me from memory only moments before. Oops. If I can paraphrase a famous Seinfeld sketch and adapt it to the situation in question, “You know how to explain the procedure, you just don’t know how to do the procedure. And that’s really the most important part of the procedure, the doing.”

Part of me just wants to pretend we’re done, say thank you, collect my stuff that I’ve put through the X-ray machine and move on, but we both know he’s forgotten something. I know what it is. He clearly doesn’t. Like an encouraging teacher to a struggling student, I try and help him along.

“Don’t forget the wheels,” I tell him, reminding him to swab the wheel with a cloth and run it through the X-ray machine to check it for explosive chemicals. Then I show him my hands, hoping he’ll pick up on the next clue, “And the gloves, swipe the gloves.”

“Right,” he says, before following my directions and thanking me for the reminder.

Now, I’m not Macgruber. I don’t know how I would or could cause any sort of trouble with nothing more than a set of detachable wheels and a presumably explosive chemical sprinkled throughout, which if it were truly explosive, I certainly wouldn’t want to be touching with my half gloved hands all day as I push around. However, the fact is, it is TSA procedure, and the majority of TSA agents don’t remember it, or how to follow it correctly. All of this leads me to wonder, what else are they forgetting? More importantly, when will the training improve so that passengers like myself aren’t walking TSA employees through their own rules and regulations?

I’ve asked it before and I’ll ask it again: Anyone? Anyone? I would honestly like to know the answer.

APPLE EXTENDS ITUNES SONG SAMPLES, BULLIES LABELS INTO COMPLIANCE

Article first published as Apple Extends iTunes Song Samples, Bullies Labels Into Compliance on Technorati.

 Being Steve Jobs is difficult. So was being his boss, when he had one. The Apple CEO keeps a busy schedule that probably makes his iCal look like a rainbow-colored war zone. When he’s not busy creating innovative products, or defending Apple patents, or firing off curt e-mails to consumers, or costing someone their job, he likes to boss around the record labels. All in the name of improving the consumer experience, of course. 

Late yesterday, TechCrunch broke the story that Apple is planning to extend the length of iTunes music samples from the current 30 seconds to a generous 90 seconds for songs longer than 2:30 hoping the end result is an increase in sales. Consumers will get more sample time, and Apple and artists alike will make more money. What could be wrong with that?

Not much. Except Apple didn’t exactly ask. Instead, the “iTunes Store Team,“ who by all appearances have the grace and skill of seasoned PR professionals sent off a letter to record label representatives about the new “pleasing” development.

“We are pleased to let you know that we are preparing to increase the length of music previews from 30 seconds to 90 seconds on the iTunes Store in the United States. We believe that giving potential customers more time to listen to your music will lead to more purchases.”

The email also notes that by continuing to offer their music through the iTunes Store, labels are opting-in to the new terms. If they don’t like it, tough. They can leave. Given that the iTunes store continues to dominate the world of digital music distribution giving artists both big and small a platform to connect with new audiences, the likelihood of that happening isn’t very high.

The central premise of Apple’s argument for increasing song length is debatable. Sure users will appreciate having longer samples to listen to, but it remains to be seen if doing so increases sales. Many users who buy songs through the iTunes Music Store probably aren’t doing so after a first listen of a 30-second sound sample. They’ve heard the whole thing on Pandora, or the latest episode of Glee, or their friend sent it to them, and now they cruise over to iTunes for a quick (and legal) purchase.

Still, the move is likely to be appreciated by music lovers just the same. Even if what they’re really waiting for is music in the cloud. They were close once with Lala, but as the saying goes, “If you can’t beat them, buy them, and shut them down.” Something like that.

What do you think? Will the new extended song samples make users any more likely to purchase songs through iTunes, or like Ping, will anyone care?