NEWS : TECH (NFPC)

Does the Internet Have a 'Kill Switch'?

It’s an enticing premise out of a James Bond film: a device somewhere that, with the flick of a switch or the press of a button (or, somewhat more realistically, a typed code on a computer), can bring the World Wide Web to a sudden halt against an impenetrable wall of 404 Error codes.

No more e-mails. No more websites. No more adorable kitty memes. All of it gone, on the whim of arguably the most powerful person in the world.

BLOG: Internet Costs and Choices Still Stink

Rumors have circulated that governments in Egypt, Iran, and elsewhere have tried to develop just such a "kill switch" to disable the Internet. Sci-fi speculation aside, a recent statement on Yahoo News UK from the man who invented the World Wide Web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, pours cold water on that theory:

"Berners-Lee, who launched the web on Christmas Day 1990, said the only way the internet could ever be entirely shut down is if governments all over the world coordinated to make it a centralized system....The way the internet is designed is very much as a decentralized system. At the moment, because countries connect to each other in lots of different ways, there is no one off-switch, there is no central place where you can turn it off."

Governments and powerful individuals clearly have a vested interest in keeping some information off the Internet. Witness the concern over Wikileaks releases and even Mitt Romney’s tax records, which may or may not have been recently stolen by a hacker allegedly demanding ransom.

But killing the Internet to prevent dissemination of such secrets would be like killing a fly with a sledgehammer—and likely be ineffective anyway.

 WATCH VIDEO: Blind Surf the Web

Though it would be virtually impossible to switch the Internet as a whole off, there have of course been various countries that have blocked or restricted web access to their citizens for political purposes. China, for example, is notoriously censorious.

BLOG: Internet Makes Us Smarter & Dumber

And it’s not just countries. In March of this year, people claiming to be members of the group Anonymous announced that they planned to gravely harm (albeit temporarily) the web by targeting the world’s domain name servers, thereby making it impossible to perform a domain name look-up, effectively rendering most of the Internet inaccessible (though hardly “dead”). It was supposed to have happened on March 31, though given the nature of the Anonymous organization it’s not clear if the threat was real (and unsuccessful) or a prank.

In response to claims that he was one of the few people who could pull the plug on the Internet, Berners-Lee joked: "I am afraid that now that you know I will have to shoot you."

Credit: Corbis Images

---

Email:

---

The Next-iPhone Season Draws Near, So Read Wisely

It's that time of year: As the days heat up, so does irregularly informed speculation about Apple's next iPhone.

We do this every summer because new iPhones have arrived with clockwork regularity every June or July (up until the October arrival of the iPhone 4S last year), because Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference next month provides a logical stage for the company to talk about its mobile ambitions (even if it doesn't) and because buyers who have been waiting for a new phone get curious.

ANALYSIS: iPhone Has Night Vision with Adapter

But the number of people hoping to break news about the next model -- or at least draw readers with posts about it -- vastly outnumbers the supply of informed sources. That results in a surplus of rumor stories that look silly or outright delusional once Apple unveils the real thing.

Bigger Screen

The most popular storyline this time around predicts a bigger screen, maybe a full 4 inches. Even a mere 3.999 inches would by virtue of being taller than the current 3.5-inch display fit into the same case as today's model.

DNEWS VIDEO: iPhone in Space Explained

That makes enough sense to me. The iPhone's screen looks a little dinky compared to competitors, even setting aside enormophones like Samsung's Galaxy Note. And finding a way to enlarge the iPhone's screen without requiring a larger device (a theory apparently first suggested by a listener to The Verge's podcast) would respect Apple's precedent of not shipping new mobile devices larger than their predecessors.

4G LTE Mobile Broadband

Adding 4G LTE mobile broadband should be equally obvious. The new iPad already has it and so do most new Android phones; more importantly, we're starting to see more efficient LTE chipsets that, coupled with Apple's usual talent for stretching out battery life, should permit faster wireless access without cutting into the iPhone's excellent runtime. Apple seems militantly opposed to shipping a new device with battery life inferior to its older models. Its competitors would do well to follow that example.

Free Maps App

A rebuilt, Google-free Maps app is not just logical but horribly overdue. Android phones not only do turn-by-turn navigation but offer bicycling directions and can even tell you when to get off the bus; Apple needs to fix this before it addresses anything else in the iPhone's iOS operating system.

ANALYSIS: The World's First iPhone Charger Case

But a fourth somewhat popular forecast, one calling for a smaller dock connector, makes zero sense to me. Why would Apple want to break most iPhone accessories shipped since day one? I would love to see the company join the rest of the computing universe and adopt the micro-USB standard, but that's not going to happen, for much the same reason.

What to Ignore

You can ignore entire categories of iPhone rumors because of their sourcing. Industry analysts have a horrible record of inaccuracy with Apple predictions. Overseas component manufacturers rarely know what they're talking about (Time's Harry McCracken found that 16 of 25 Apple-rumor stories published by DigiTimes, a common outlet for that sort of report, were "mostly or completely off-base.") And Apple patent filings rarely signify anything more than the addition of yet another weapon to its intellectual-property armory.

So if anybody cites that sort of evidence as proof that the next iPhone will support wireless charging or allow NFC payments... tell them to wait until next year.

Credit: Rob Pegoraro / Discovery

---

Email:

---

Carbon-freeze Yourself a la Han Solo

If you wept Wookie tears like Chewie did when Han Solo was put into carbon-freeze in "The Empire Strikes Back," you know what a memorable moment it was in the Star Wars franchise.

Now guests attending Star Wars Weekends at "The Happiest Place on Earth" will have a chance to make their own memorable moment by freezing themselves in carbonite, compliments of The Dark Side Walt Disney World.

BLOG: Space Elevator, Going Up

DNEWS VIDEO: CYBORGS, WIRELESS INTERNET, EXOSKELETONS, SYNTHETIC LIFE AND MORE …

Well, not really. While you won't end up frozen in real carbonite and hung like a trophy on Jabba the Hutt's wall, beginning May 18 you'll get to have a likeness of yourself frozen in fake carbonite that you can display on your mantle.

Once the theme song to "It's a Small World" gets so stuck in your head you want to hurl yourself into the gator-infested swamps of South Florida, head on over to the "Carbon Freezing Chamber." Here you can have your face 3-D scanned by multiple cameras to create an 8-inch replica of yourself frozen in carbonite. And because -- why the heck not? -- you'll get a light-up wristband.

Trust me, when you can't rid your brain of "It's a world of laughter, a world of tears," you'll be wishing that, besides temporary blindness, carbon freezing also caused temporary deafness, so at least you could pretend the process is real. After all, Disney does encourage you to journey into your imagination.

Also, your carbonite hibernation will be a good exercise in patience, because your souvenir is going to take four weeks to finish and ship. But I'm sure die-hard Star Wars fans would be willing to wait a lot longer for such an iconic piece of memorabilia.

NEWS: Warped Imaginations: Star Wars Fans Want a NASA Hyperdrive

Better hurry, though. Reservations are required and Disney reps say they're likely to be fully booked within a few days. Have your wallets ready, too. Your "carbonite" figurine is going to set you back $99.95 plus shipping and handling. You're also going to need to fork over $85 for general admission to Disney's Hollywood Studios Theme Park.

If you think Disney is fleecing you, don't worry. I've got Boba Fett's cell phone number; he'll take care of it. He's my preferred bounty hunter and has never let me down. Who do you think tracked Han to Cloud City, where he was captured and then frozen? Indeed, it's a small world after all.

via Inside the Magic

Credit: Inside the Magic

---

Email:

---

Dad Builds TIE Fighter for Son

Attention all fathers: Sorry to crush your dreams, but if you harbored any hope of winning Dad Of The Year, you can stop. Voting is closed.

BLOG: Robotic Cheetah Breaks Land Speed Record

The numbers are officially in. The title of Father Of The Year goes to this Olympia Washington man named Dave who helped his son build a 1/3-scale replica TIE Fighter. He posted an add on Craigslist to sell the contraption, and that started causing a lot of buzz.

Still living under a rock and don't know what a TIE Fighter is? Here's a friendly reminder from a long time ago in galaxy far, far away.

DNEWS VIDEO: JET PACK: IS IT POSSIBLE?

"Well built out of 3/4 plywood with the wings sheeted in cardboard," Dave's Craigslist ad explained. "Tested to hold over 300 pounds. Cockpit is 38 inches by 38 inches and my 5ft tall son comfortably sits inside."

Dave added: 

All the edges to the body panels are 22.5 degrees. The main panels are 16x24, the front and rear panels off those are 16x12, all ¾ birch plywood. The wing struts are boxed 8 inches wide, ¾ plywood, 30 inches long. They are attached with Simpson 90 degree gussets and re-enforced with 2x2s. The lower half of the wings are 2x4 sheeted in cardboard. The upper half are 1x2 sheeted in cardboard. The wing to strut connection is a compression fitting design.

And if that weren't enough, two years ago, Dave and his son built my personal favorite, an X-Wing Fighter. To boot, this guy also used this father/son moment to teach his kid the Pythagorean Theorem so he could then teach his younger siblings. For Pete's sake, in my opinion, this guy wins Dad Of The Decade.

BLOG: Warped Imaginations: Star Wars Fans Want A NASA Hyperdrive

One of my best friends lives in Olympia, Wash., so Dave, if I ever make it out there for a visit, like, wanna hang out? What say you, me and the family make a Speeder Bike from Return Of The Jedi. via Geekwire

Credit: Dave, Dad Of The Year

---

Email:

---

Santa Gets His Own Pho-ho-hone Number

With popular Christmas postmarks like these on the U.S. Postal Service's list of planned closures, nice children of the world are facing a serious threat. They're running out of places to address their letters to Santa.

DNEWS VIDEO: CYBORGS, WIRELESS INTERNET, EXOSKELETONS, SYNTHETIC LIFE AND MORE …

PHOTOS: 10 New Gadgets Ready for Their Close-Up

But this is the age of iPhones and Skype, is it not? Jolly ole' St. Nick may be old, but his methods for receiving wish lists these days are anything but. Turns out, Mr. Claus has his own Google Voice number, so tech-savvy youngsters can just dial him up.

Because he's a busy man this time of year, he'll call you back. Just log on to Send a Call From Santa to set up a personalized call to yourself or others. Calls can be customized to include the recipient's name, where they live and what they want for Christmas.

Don't celebrate Christmas? Don't worry, Santa is broad in the belt and the mind. So just let him know what winter holiday you or your call recipient celebrates, and he'll be sure to deliver holiday cheer that knows no boundaries.

BLOG: Go Fly a Kite for a Better Wind Farm

Calls are free for U.S. and Canadian residents. However, calls outside those areas will cost $.01 a minute. Hmm, maybe Santa's holiday cheer does know some boundaries.

[Via GizMag]

Credit: Gary Buss/Getty Images

---

Email:

---

Don't Pull An Alec Baldwin Over Airplane Mode

I have a confession to make: I don't turn off my phone on a plane before takeoff and landing--I just put it in airplane mode. Sometimes I take photos on the way up or down too. I'll bet most of you can plead guilty to the same offenses.

The airlines' longstanding prohibition against having electronic devices powered on during those phases of flight is in the news yet again. Ten days ago, the New York Times' Nick Bilton noted the lack of evidence of any danger from keeping gadgets on but offline -- and the fact that powering a phone back on causes it to blurt out a burst of wireless signals. That led to a petition at the White House's site asking the Federal Aviation Administration to permit passengers to use those devices in airplane mode during taxing, takeoff and landing (at 1,080 signatures as of this writing, it's woefully short of the 25,000 needed for it to earn a response).

DNEWS VIDEO: WHY DO WE HAVE TO TURN OUR PHONES OFF ON AIRPLANES?

Then Alec Baldwin had a temper tantrum. The actor didn't want to stop playing Words With Friends on his phone while his American Airlines plane was at the gate with its door closed. He got kicked off the flight for his trouble and then started mocking American on his (since-closed) Twitter account.

Baldwin could have been a martyr for gadget lovers, except his real offenses were insulting the cabin crew, then retreating to the lavatory and shoving the door shut loudly enough for the captain to hear.

But for those of us with the courtesy to avoid "Do You Know Who I Am?!" rudeness, what about the underlying evidence? It leaves little room for other interpretations: It's fine if you keep your phone, tablet or e-book reader in airplane mode. Years of research (not to mention an investigation by Discovery's Mythbusters) have failed to prove a correlation between keeping a device powered on but offline and subsequent malfunctions by a plane's electronic hardware.

The best advocates for this prohibition can say is that there's a one in a million chance of a random glitch, so we're better safe than sorry. Problem is, far more than one in every million passengers forget to switch a phone to airplane mode. (I once left mine on from Washington to most of the way to San Francisco; fortunately, nobody tried to call.) If this were a real danger, cabin crews would collect phones before takeoff.

(The ban on in-air phone transmissions comes from the Federal Communications Commission, which wants to prevent interference with ground-based wireless networks.)

There are good reasons to put your phone away during taxiing, takeoff and landing: You should pay attention to your surroundings and the safety briefing (pop quiz: where's the closest emergency exit?). You shouldn't read a book or magazine during those times either -- but our collective digital-versus-analog hangup gives us one rule for electronic reading and none for the analog kind.

So my advice is to switch your phone to airplane mode, then put it away until the all-clear at 10,000 feet or after exiting the runway. Save your (discreet) photography of the departure or approach for when the landing gear are up.

But if a flight attendant catches you and tells you to shut down your device, don't get into a fight. Nobody will take your side. Even if -- no, especially if -- you're a celebrity with a reputation for poor anger management.

Credit: Rob Pegoraro/Discovery

---

Email:

---

Do People Lie More Online?

In 1996, University of Virginia psychologist Bella M. DePaulo published a landmark study on lying that revealed an ugly truth about humans: Everyone fibs left and right.

DePaulo asked participants keep a daily dairy and jot down who they spoke to, what they said and whether they were telling the truth or lying, even during the most casual interactions.

The results? People dropped an average of two lies every day. 

Since the DePaulo study, many of our day-to-day interactions have moved online through social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and online dating portals.

We're communicating in new ways, but we have the same old anxieties about who’s telling the truth. Without the face-to-face interaction that provides non-verbal cues of deception (i.e., avoiding eye contact), we’re more concerned than ever about whether we can believe what we see online.

WIDE ANGLE: SOCIAL NETWORKING. Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, MySpace and LinkedIn. If you're in, you're networked. We'll look at how social network sites are changing our lives, what happens to the photos, email and personal information we post to those sites, the potential dark site of social media and how high-speed data networks will change what we put online.

That handsome doctor you met on OKCupid? Must be a creep. The neighbor on Facebook with a million friends? Probably a shut-in. The glowing resume on LinkedIn? Has to be fake.

“Most people believe that given the opportunity, everything else equal, people will lie more online than they would face-to-face,” said Jeff Hancock, an associate professor of communications at Cornell University who specializes in information technology and deception. 

Hancock calls this the “cues heuristic,” which means the fewer deception-detecting signals at our disposal, the less we’ll trust someone.

At the same time, research indicates that technology, which allows us craft picture-perfect social networking profiles or e-mail in sick when we’re lounging on the beach, isn’t tempting us to lie any more than we normally do.

“Deception online and face to face is motivated by the same human needs,” said Catalina Toma, an assistant professor of communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who has studied online deception. “Technology simply interferes in some ways that might decrease or facilitate the opportunity to lie.”

Surprisingly, a study of deception in e-mails versus phone calls found that people were more honest in e-mails because they can be documented, saved and aren’t real-time communication scenarios, which is when most people drop white lies.

Technology isn't the gateway to rampant deception; instead, Toma and Hancock both suspect that our distrust of communication technology is more likely rooted in our fear of it.

“We’ve evolved as a species that talks face to face, and evolution is a slow process, and we’re interacting in a new environment where our basic assumptions are undercut,” Hancock said.

So, in a way, it’s natural to expect people to lie more online.

NEWS: Social Networks and Online Gaming Rule Our Lives

“Every time a technology is new, it elicits great fears. Many people are fearful about what it’s going to do,” Toma said. “So I think fears about deception stem from this general fear of technology and certain features of technologies that make it easy to lie.”

However, we can rest easier since people don’t always take advantage of these tech-facilitated opportunities to lie. Just like face-to-face lying, there’s a cost-benefits evaluation involved in online deception.

For example, Hancock and Toma’s research on deception in online dating has found that around 80 percent of people pepper their profiles with “very, very small” lies, such as a man saying he’s 6 feet tall, when he’s really 5 feet 10 inches.

Fudging one’s height is a minor cost with a major self-presentation benefit of looking more appealing to potential partners.

On the flip side, Hancock’s recent study comparing deception in traditional resumes (the average American drops in three fibs) versus digital resumes posted on LinkedIn found fewer flagrant lies online.

HOWSTUFFWORKS: Are Online Social Networks Addictive?

In that case, misrepresenting a point, such as your tenure at a company, is easy to verify  in an online network perhaps populated by other coworkers and employers -- and therefore too great of a risk.

Fingering a lie online – and in-person – also relies less on spotting specific factual slip-ups than noticing overall inconsistencies in how people present themselves.

“It’s really important to know that there is no single cue that always predicts deception, and a lot of people will tell you differently,” Hancock said. “And even more importantly, we’re not very good as humans at judging deception. So, if someone’s trying to lie to us, they have a leg up."

In fact, Hancock’s advice for detecting deception online is a solid rule of thumb for pinpointing Pinocchios in the real world.

“One of my friends is a prison guard, and he and I were talking about some of our research, and he told me there’s a saying among the guards that if something doesn’t feel right, it’s not,” Hancock said. “The idea (with spotting online deception) is to pay attention to how you’re feeling about things, and that if something doesn’t feel quite right or is too good to be true, it probably is.”

---

Email:

---

Photo: Ian Sanderson/Getty Images

Halloween Sex Offender App Fuels False Fears

For parents worried about the safety of their little ghosts and goblins this Halloween, there’s a new iPhone application that claims to locate registered sex offenders.

According to an ABC News.com story,

“Launched by ThinAir Wireless, a GPS-tracking and wireless monitoring company, the Offender Locator iPhone application lets users view registered sex offenders living in their area. The app comes in free and paid versions, but after nearly two months in the App store, the 99-cent application is among the ten best-selling paid apps. Amid the games and entertainment applications, Offender Locator has grabbed the sixth spot on the list.”

 

While the smart phone app may make some parents feel safer, it is a false sense of security. Contrary to popular perception (and the name of the application), the app does not track nor locate convicted sex offenders, merely the addresses where they are registered as residing.

Simply knowing where a convicted sex offender lives tells you nothing about who might answer the door, since unless he or she lives alone, there will likely be non-sex offenders at the residence. Furthermore, many sex offender registries are out of date, and convicted sex offenders can move freely anywhere during Halloween, from public places to other peoples’ houses -- or may be trick-or-treating with their own kids.

But don’t children need extra protection on Halloween? The premise that children are at increased risk from sex offenders has been studied -- and disproven. Recent research has shown that the public has little to fear from sex offenders during All Hallow’s Eve. One study titled “How Safe Are Trick-or-Treaters?” was published in the September 2009 issue of Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment and examined 67,307 non-family sex offenses reported to law enforcement in 30 states over nine years. The conclusion was that children are at no greater risk for sexual assault around Halloween that any other time: "There does not appear to be a need for alarm concerning sexual abuse on these particular days. Halloween appears to be just another autumn day where rates of sex crimes against children are concerned,” the researchers reported.

There’s yet another popular myth in all this: Multiple Department of Justice studies have concluded that sex offenders are no more likely to re-offend than other criminals. In fact, the greatest threat to children comes not from strangers or convicted sex offenders, but from the children’s parents and trusted guardians. Parents should of course guard their children, but there is no evidence that sex offenders are a particular threat to kids, during Halloween or any other time.

President Obama to Appear on Mythbusters

First, a little history. Back between 214 to 212 B.C., the Romans took siege of the city of Syracuse, located on what is known today as the island of Sicily. Greek and Roman historians have written that Archimedes -- the Greek mathematician, physicist, engineer, inventor and astronomer -- attempted to thwart the invasion by designing a large mirror that was able to concentrate sunlight onto the Roman ships in the harbor and burn them. (I'm reminded of the Vdara Hotel in Vegas, which is a curved, glassy structure that to the architects' chagrin, no doubt, focuses sunlight onto parts of the hotel's pool deck, rending it too hot for use.)

Attempts to prove whether this was possible or not have been tried over and over again by a variety of people, including students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who repeated their test with Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman from Mythbusters.

But Savage and Hyneman must not have been satisfied with their results (busted) from that episode because it looks like they're conducting the test again and this time with President Obama. The President announced his cameo today at the White House Science Fair. He said, “I'm pleased to welcome Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage, known as the Mybusters. I can announce today that I taped a special guest appearance for their show, although I didn't get blow anything up… I was a little frustrated about that.”

More deets from Discovery's press release:

Adam and Jamie were present in November 2009 for the President's 'Educate to Innovate' event, which kicked off the Administration's campaign for science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) awareness. The December 8 Mythbusters episode is part of a sweeping, multi-platform initiative launched by Discovery Communications called “Be the Future,” which also includes such commitments as Head Rush, a commercial-free science block for kids that launched in August on Science Channel, and several initiatives of Discovery Education, which will make this special episode of Mythbusters available to students and educators across the country through Discovery Education's curriculum-based digital resources.

I'll be tuning in to show, which will air on December 8 at 9 ET/PT. How about you?

Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

---

Email:

---