Saturday, April 04, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
from them to me in response to me asking them how they could possibly consider taking away weekend commuter rail service:
"I have read your email regarding the possible service cuts in the commuter rail service.
The announcement and press release about an increase in MBTA fares along with a possible reduction in evening and weekend service on the commuter rail are options that are being discussed by senior managers at the MBTA and the Office of Transportation. It has been well publicized that the MBTA currently has a 160million dollar deficit going into next year which it needs to reduce.
I suspect that there will be an opportunity for passengers and residents to attend public meetings regarding these proposals. Past experience has shown that any such meetings are normally posted on the MBTA website beforehand. www.mbta.com
Thank you for your comments; please be assured that I have forwarded your concerns to the MBTA for consideration.
MBCR Customer Service Manager"
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Does Facebook, now with more than 175 million users worldwide, have a content death wish? Perhaps.
Just read its newest terms of service. What you'll find is that all content posted at Facebook belongs to, well, Facebook. But it's worse than that. New phrasing makes clear that, even if you leave Facebook, your rights don't leave with you. Quoting:
The following sections will survive any termination of your use of the Facebook Service: Prohibited Conduct, User Content, Your Privacy Practices, Gift Credits, Ownership; Proprietary Rights, Licenses, Submissions, User Disputes; Complaints, Indemnity, General Disclaimers, Limitation on Liability, Termination and Changes to the Facebook Service, Arbitration, Governing Law; Venue and Jurisdiction and Other. [Emphasis added.]
To be fair, Facebook officially is asking only for a "non-exclusive license" to your creations hosted at its site. I can understand that. Facebook isn't a publication and posting original writing there shouldn't result in royalty checks.
Claiming permanent dominion is another matter entirely. This move would position Facebook as a content owner a la New York Times Co. (NYSE: NYT), Washington Post (NYSE: WPO), or Gannett (NYSE: GCI), rather than as a service provider a la Twitter, which doesn't claim content rights. That's, at best, insipid.
Think about it. If, like News Corp.'s (NYSE: NWS) MySpace, Facebook's business is advertising, and advertisers are only interested in reachable audiences, former Facebookers are irrelevant to its business.
Even Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), another ad-driven business that specifies similar terms in its usage policy, recognizes limits to its rights to content. "This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services," the policy reads.
Facebook, for its part, responded with a blog post from CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Quoting:
When a person shares something like a message with a friend, two copies of that information are created -- one in the person's sent messages box and the other in their friend's inbox. Even if the person deactivates their account, their friend still has a copy of that message. We think this is the right way for Facebook to work, and it is consistent with how other services like email work. One of the reasons we updated our terms was to make this more clear. In reality, we wouldn't share your information in a way you wouldn't want. [Emphasis added.]
OK, but I'm not sure that's the point. What is? I should own my content, Facebook, not you. When I'm gone, my content should come with me. So archive if you must, but don't claim rights to distribute and profit from the archive -- it isn't yours to profit from.
More Foolishness about Facebook:
Saturday, February 07, 2009
living in the Boston area to participate in a study aimed at understanding
how people create their avatars.
Eligible participants will be asked to come to the Psychology Department
at Harvard University for 2-3 hours to complete an interview about their
avatar and answer a number of questions about their moods, habits, and
Participants will be paid $40 for their involvement in this confidential
To learn more, please email Stephanie at email@example.com"
Saturday, January 17, 2009
The coupon is worth $40. It is illegal for me to sell it. I'd rather give it away for free than to see it go to waste. Someone on Ebay is selling "information" on how to get a coupon. Pretty clever but I decided it wasn't worth it. This is the government they're f**king with.
Do you know anyone who needs one? It's only for people who use an antenna for their TV....
Thanks for your time (btw - feel free to share this post with anyone you think it might help)! -Yvonne
Friday, January 16, 2009
Friday, December 12, 2008
It seems that some Democrats and the Bush administration have finally found something to agree on: opposition to the FCC’s free Wi-Fi plan. On December 18, the Federal Communications Commission is expected to vote on a proposal that would auction off the AWS-3 wireless spectrum that becomes available in February 2009 after television stations go all digital. The winner of the spectrum would be required to use part of it for a national, ad-supported free wireless Internet service. The free Wi-Fi would have to be implemented within a few years of winning the auction and requires the company to construct filters that protect minors from adult content.
To Read more go to : http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20081212/tc_pcworld/fccsfreewifiplanwillitfly