Here’s another podcast version of my BBC World Service column, which runs on the World Business Report. It’s about new words and where they come from. Download it, or subscribe to the podcast feed here.
The End of Airport WiFi?
An interesting battle is going on in Boston over airport WiFi. If one side wins it may spell the end to WiFi in airports — at least those not operated by the airport itself. The Boston Globe reports that Logan International Airport officials’ ongoing quest to ban airline lounges from offering passengers free WiFi Internet services is angering a growing array of powerful Capitol Hill lobbying groups, who say Logan could set a dangerous nationwide precedent for squelching wireless services:
Soon after activating its own $8-a-day WiFi service in the summer of 2004, the Massachusetts Port Authority, which runs Logan, ordered Continental and American Airlines to shut down WiFi services in their Logan lounges. Massport also ordered Delta Air Lines Inc. not to turn on a planned WiFi service in its new $500 million Terminal A that opened last March. […]
Massport has consistently argued its policy is only trying to prevent a proliferation of private WiFi transmitters that could interfere with wireless networks used by airlines, State Police, and the Transportation Security Administration. WiFi service providers are free to negotiate so-called roaming deals, Massport officials say, that would let their subscribers who pay for monthly access use the Logan network. But major providers including T-Mobile USA have balked at Massport’s proposed terms, saying the airport authority seeks excessive profits.
It all sounds a bit lame to me. My experience of Logan’s WiFi in late 2004 was woeful, although perhaps that has changed, as Massport’s PR later said they were having teething troubles as it had just been installed. But it seems weak to argue that one WiFi service may not affect communications whereas others might;to charge excessively for it seems to suggest the real motive. If interference is the problem, will all those in-office WiFi networks in terminal offices be closed down, and will all onboard WiFi networks be banned too? What about buildings close to the airport?
The scary thing is that if Massport win this other airports are bound to leap aboard. And not just in the U.S. If airport authorities think they can make money out of this, I’m sure they will follow suit. I’m worried. Unless it means better and free WiFi in airports, in which case I’m all for it. Let’s face it, sometimes WiFi services are so bad in airports you feel as if it’s too important a commodity to be left to small bitplayers. More discussion of the issues here and here.
Tis The Season to Fall for Silly Phone Scams
Amid the increasing sophistication of online scams, it’s easy to forget that sometimes the simplest tricks are the most effective. These involve a phone, a victim and a bit of social engineering. And they work best when people are silly, which is what the holiday season is all about.
WLUC TV6 reports from Michigan of a woman who gave out her bank account information over the phone after a company called her asking her to participate in a program where she would receive a $500 gift certificate. The company, Star Communications, has not yet been located because they only have a post office box and dummy telephone numbers, the piece says.
The Port Townsend Leader from Washington reports of a phone scam where a man calls “and claimed the Jefferson County Food Bank Association desperately needs money. The caller said he wanted to pick up a check right away.” The Leader reports “The savvy resident checked with the food bank before he wrote a check.” Smart fella. The Food Bank itself is concerned. Manager Helen Kullmann says: “It could give us a bad name if the phone scam continues.”
The Mohave Daily News in Arizona reports of a scam whereby victims are phoned by someone pretending to be from Reader’s Digest, where they’re asking people to go out to Circle K, or local stores in town here to [wire] $35 to somewhere in Fort Lauderdale, Florida … to either a person named Robert Adams or Paula Adams. The scam guarantees a large cash prize. The FBI’s advice? “If you give cash to someone who is just an individual who says they represent an organization, well, they may or may not represent that organization. It’s unfortunate.” Indeedy-o.
Skype Buddy List Spam
It seems people are catching onto Stuart Henshall’s trick of playing with your Skype name to get it at the top of people’s buddy lists. Two people on my list have put period marks at the beginning of their profile name, messing with the alphabetical order to get their names above all my legitimate friends. This is what it looks like (names changed to protect the embarrassed):
Now, I’m all for letting people call themselves whatever they like, and the owner of the buddy list is always at liberty to rename but what’s the point of this? Is it a form of spam, and if so, should we call it Buddy List Spam? And, taken to its logical conclusion, are we going to see folk adopting profile names like @(!#)!BoogieMan, just so BoogieMan can be at the top of my list (until of course, I delete him in disgust or rename him zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZob.)
What I’m not clear about is what happens once you’ve renamed a contact. Does that name stay forever, whatever the owner of that profile does to their profile name? Seems to.
Wikipedia, Porn and the Airbrushing of History
An intriguing part of the story about Wikipedia and John Seigenthaler, the maligned journalist who found his Wikipedia biography had him as a JFK assassination suspect, is that the savvy folk obsessively monitor their own Wikipedia biographies, including Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales himself
who has edited it frequently, removing references to a credited “co-founder” of the encyclopedia and obscuring the nature of a pornographic web site he once published. Though some Wikipedia editors believe that it’s always wrong to edit subjects in which you are involved, this idea is clearly not shared by Wales. The edit history of his biography reveals that he’s made 18 changes with the account Jimbo Wales, most recently on Dec. 2.
The alleged co-founder in question is Larry Sanger, who coincidentally is setting up a ‘rival’ to Wikipedia, called Digital Universe which
aims to build on the model of free online encyclopedia Wikipedia by inviting acknowledged experts in a range of subjects to review material contributed by the general public. Called Digital Universe, the project is the brainchild of, among others, USWeb founder Joe Firmage and Larry Sanger, one of Wikipedia’s earliest creators.
By providing a service they’re calling “the PBS of the Web,” the Digital Universe team hopes to create a new era of free and open access to wide swaths of information on virtually any topic.
According to Roger Cadenhead’s piece, Jimmy Wales is energetic in refuting any role for Sanger in the emergence of Wikipedia:
On seven different occasions, Wales has altered sentences that gave Larry Sanger credit for cofounding Wikipedia. Sanger, a former employee of Wales whose job was eliminated in 2002, led the project as “chief organizer” from its January 2001 launch and gave the site its name. He described himself as Wikipedia’s cofounder in a 2004 Kuro5hin article. Wales does not share this view. On Oct. 28, 2005, he changed the text “Wales and Sanger set up Wikipedia” to “Wales set up Wikipedia.” He made the change again later that day and repeated it on Nov. 9 and Dec. 1 — other editors kept putting language back in that credited Sanger.
It’s an interesting conundrum. Of course, Wales is not alone in monitoring his biography, and I’m sure if I had one, I would monitor it obsessively too. But when does ensuring that you’re not being accused of masterminding the assassination of presidents become Stalinesque airbrushing of history? And the logical result of this is that every biography on Wikipedia becomes an autobiography, which may keep the subjects happy, but may mark the end of Wikipedia as a useful tool.