Google+ and how it could help with political activism online

With the exception of underwear, Google seems to have become directly involved in every aspect of our lives. By introducing the Google+ social network a couple of weeks ago, they now aim to become a hub for our personal interaction online with our friends, as well as our social circles.

How’s Google+ different from Facebook and twitter?

One of Facebook’s strongest points is the home screen;  a simple way of finding out what’s going on with your friends and loved ones. We might be taking it for granted, but the level of interaction on Facebook is quite phenomenal. You can share a photo or video, with a title, description, and your own comment. After that, people can ‘like’ it and comment. So it becomes a stream of interesting, relevant topics, each with its own interaction.

However, on Facebook, you have to ‘friend’ people to interact with them. This means that they will be able to access your photos, updates, etc. Of course you can have different levels of security, but a) it’s a bit too complicated for the average person not willing to waste time on settings, and b) people can tell if they’re on a limited profile and it becomes quite awkward (we all know that feeling).

On the other hand, there’s twitter. Here you can follow anyone and everyone, it has nothing to do with whether or not you know that person. It’s ideal because you customize your timeline to the extent that almost all of the tweets showing up are of interest, because you’ve chosen whom to follow. However, all you have are the tweets with links. You don’t have ‘likes’ that indicate how many people support the update (you have retweets, but it’s not that same), and you don’t have comments organized on that particular update (each with the possibility of ‘like’ing it as well).

That’s where Google+ comes in. You add people to your ‘circles’ – you can have as many as you want, and add the same person to more than one circle. You don’t need to be friends, so just choose whoever you’re interesting in following. When you open Google+, you get a home screen almost identical to that of Facebook: updates by people with images or videos, description, ‘plus’es (exactly like Facebook’s ‘like’). The big difference, however, is that you have the different ‘circles’ to choose from.

For example, you can create a circle called ‘Alexandria’ where you follow any of the people you know of (but don’t necessarily know personally) who will be updating about anything going on in Alex. You might think this is like a twitter list, well in a basic way it is, but if you have a list on twitter with Alexandrians, the tweets show up in reverse chronological order regardless of their content, and the interaction with the individual tweets is not visible.

With Google+, you can click on the Alexandria circle on the left to filter all of the updates on the home screen, and you’ll see the updates with the thumbnails (or the videos to be viewed directly), and the ‘plus’es as well as the comments. Moreover, it’s automatically sorted according to the updates with most interaction relevant to you.

This is obviously assuming that everyone you’re after is on Google+. With over 20 million users already, and the ease of joining and inviting, it’s hard to see why you would face a problem. Also the mobile app (I’ve installed it on my Android) is pretty slick.

So that covers the major differences in comparison with Facebook and twitter. The following are some other features that I don’t see as important, yet they’re worth mentioning:

• Messaging, which Google called ‘Huddle’ is an attempt to make it easier to send and receive messages with people on Google+. It is similar to Facebook messages, only there’s a separate mobile application to save taps and give you direct access to the messages. It’s meant to be lightweight, and you can send messages to circles. Time will tell how useful this feature really is.
• Video chat with multiple users is an impressive feature. Realistically, though, I doubt it’ll catch on
• Backup photos and content to be shared later, or remove your entire account – something Facebook doesn’t let you do

As a social network, it’s got a sleek interface and some neat features. But let’s get down to business, we all know that socializing is what you do when you’ve got spare time, but Egypt and the Arab world are busying revolting.

How could we use Google+ for political activism online?

While Facebook was always the tool for discussion with friends and acquaintances, twitter took political activism online to a whole new level. The main reasons include the ability to follow those who bring you relevant updates, the simplicity in tweeting and sharing images straight from your cell phone wherever you are, as well as constant updates when on the ground at the scene.

Now that Google+ combines a bit of both, if it picks up in Egypt and the Arab world, it could be huge.

Firstly, you can use the circles for political activists. For example, you could have a circle for ‘Journalists in Egypt’ where you follow about 30 of the journalists who are actively updating. You will then have the opportunity to ‘plus’ any of the updates, and engage in comments. Other circles could depend on geographical location, so that if things get ugly in Suez, and mainstream media ignores them as usual, you could keep on eye on that circle to see the most significant updates (with less interactive/relevant updates not getting in the way and being pushed towards the bottom).

You can also create circles on the fly depending on the ongoing events. For example, if there’s a sit-in at Madrid’s main square, Sol, going on for the week, you can drag a few of the Spanish activists who you know will spend the entire week at the demonstration. Any content shared will be visible – but only if you filter by that circle, which means you’ll only see it when you feel like it.

Another advantage could be Huddle, the messaging system. If you are coordinating with a groupwho are active and on the ground with you, you could add them to a circle and easily message them directly if needed. Any sort of political group should make use of that so that if any member faces trouble, he or she could let the entire group know immediately by getting their attention, but at the same time without having to broadcast it to the world.

Facebook, then twitter, and now Google+

As an organization, regardless of its nature, Google+ facilitates the collaboration on the different tools already offered by Google, such as Calendar, Docs, etc.

If Google+ picks up, as it probably will, it won’t replace Facebook or twitter. In my opinion, it’ll make Facebook focus on friends and loved ones (as oppose to have 1,000 ‘friends’ on your list who you couldn’t care less about). It’ll also affect twitter by making it specialize in broadcasting news and minute-by-minute updates, but not discussions and arguments.

It might just fit into that pocket and complement.

In conclusion, I think Google+ could actually reduce the disadvantages of Facebook and twitter, making all three exist side-by-side. If the web spreads to the majority, then I think all three social networks, but especially Google+ and twitter, will be huge.

Let’s not forget, however, that political activism online can only do so much – it all comes down to taking the streets. That’s where revolutions happen.

Why we should all use Firefox and NOT Google Chrome

In December 2008, tech giant Google unleashed the stable version of its browser, Chrome. Less then two years later, it has eaten up over 17% of the browser market share, growing at an unprecedented rate. It’s fast and light-weight, and boasts a sleek interface. The problem, however, is that the small advantages of the new browser, come at big costs.

Google is definitely 'cooler' than Microsoft

Chrome is widely known as a free and open-source browser. Unfortunately, that is far from an accurate depiction. A proper open-source project has to stick to some basic rules and principles, and Google have failed to do the following:

1. They never released the entire code, making it more like an iPhone OS type of exploitation than it is a collaborative project
2. Instead of starting from down up, it is Google’s name that comes first, then the ‘open-source’ browser project. It defeats the purpose of celebrating the beauty of coming together from different parts of the world to bring a tool we could all benefit from. Instead, we are left with a product that gives all the credit to a company that has been making billions of dollars by ripping off advertisers (and here’s partly why it’s hypocritical, and problematic)
3. In the open-source economy, the success of projects relies on collaboration, not competition. When we all work together, we can collectively benefit. Here’s a TED talk that does a good job illustrating the advantages and mechanisms of the open-source economy:

Somewhat of a complicated lecture, but be patient, and it will all come together by the end of it

Most importantly: Google is determined to become the richest and most powerful entity on the planet, and its real competitor is not Microsoft, nor Apple, but the open-source movement. That is because instead of competing with equivalent companies, all driven by profits, it is up against a liberating movement that involves millions of people all working for the greater good. As a result, Google’s main objective with Chrome is to weaken the support behind Firefox, divide its people, diffuse the efforts, and hinder its growth.

Just as corrupt governments diffuse labor unions and rebellious groups by bribing and/or making lucrative offers, Google boasts a single, albeit solid, advantage: performance. That is the sole plus that can be made in Chrome’s defense. On the other hand, many forget about the following disadvantages in comparison to Firefox:

• Flexibility and customization is far superior in Firefox
• The massive list of add-ons available that provide a wide range of features via Mozilla make that of Chrome seem more like a joke
• HTML/CSS rendering bugs and inconsistencies in Chrome are a rare encounter in Firefox, making designers and developers work more to make their websites and applications appear properly on Google’s application

This does not mean, however, that there is something unethical about having two different open-source projects in the same industry – far from it. However, the services and functionality they offer must be different, and/or catering to different needs. Chrome is identical to Firefox in terms of who uses it and how.

While making the switch might seem appealing, let us not forget that it is a diminutive gain on the short run, and an enormous loss on the long one. Because soon, probably  by Firefox 4.0, the performance will be too close of a call. In the long term, though, we would be helping a company hiding many cockroaches behind the fridge become even more powerful and threatening, at the cost of the only movement that is seeking to benefit all of us, as well as bring the power to the people; the open-source.

Google Nexus One vs Apple iPhone 3Gs

An informative video by Gadget Video Reviews that compares Google’s new phone (manufactured by HTC) with the iPhone. Straight, to-the-point, and fills you in with what you’re really after.

Although you’ll never be able to fully judge until you get your hands on one of Google’s new boys, it is useful to have a broad idea. The one aspect that I am particularly concerned about is the touch screen of the Nexus One. If it cannot match the intuitive scrolling of its Californian counterpart, then Google might have a bit of work to do before it can grab a market share of any significance.

Top 10 Tech Stories of 2009

SoldierKnowsBest put together a casual video talking about the 10 breakthroughs to remember from 2009. It is obviously quite bias towards Apple as well as the main-stream companies, so it is best to view it as a recap of the products that made the biggest buzz in the consumer technology market in the last year.

Looking forward to the video showcasing the best open-source projects of 2009. Anyone?

Google’s 10 to the 100

Love’em or hate’em, we must not take anything away from Google’s creativity and innovation. One of the latest of which establishing an unprecedented approach to social development via the one and only: the World Wide Web. Project 10 to the 100 is a $10 million grant that Google will be handing to the chosen project related to development anywhere across the globe. After accepting applications and stacking over 150,000 applicants’ hopes and dreams with ideas on different projects, Google narrowed down the candidates to the finalists where only one will rise as the winner of the generous grant from the Californian giants.

How is the candidate chosen? This is where the community of the web comes in, and Google have cleverly taken advantage: Your vote. Every person can go on the website, read about every project, and then vote of whichever he or she has most faith in. Accordingly, the search engine pioneers will shell out a big tenner and make the project a reality. Not only have they used the web to announce their grant and facilitate communication with the different candidates, they have taken it a step further by allowing the true owners of the internet, the users, to use their power and indicate where the money will be heading. Yet another example of the immense power of the web, and how it can play a vital part in every single field across the planet. The trick is to give people the power they deserve, and Google, in this particular case, have done precisely that.

Bing vs Google

Last week, I posted a video that took a humorous approach to the search engine battle between the California giants, and then new kid on the block, Bing. Interestingly, I came across this website that does a very simple move to give you the best of both worlds, at the same time. Just like how some people would argue that a portion of contemporary art is no more than a very basic idea that the artist came up with first, Bing vs Google is something for which its creator deserves credit simply because he came up with the idea before anyone else, and brought it to us, the users, to take advantage of.

One field, two search engines

Instead of opening two separate tabs to test out the two main search engines in competition right now, you can now view the results from both worlds, by the same click, and in the same window:

Bing vs Google, at the same time

Of course, on a small screen, it wouldn’t be too useful, but who has anything smaller than a 15.4″ with at least 1280 pixels in width? Viewing them side-by-side is as fair as you can get. And even if you insist on using one of them and not the other, it might be good practice to start off with Bing vs Google to make an accurate judgment first. And let’s not forget that there’s always Ask, Yahoo!, and a few others.

Can You Compete with Google Search?

This is a short video by CollegeHumor that uses sarcasm to point out the possible lack of competition for the Google search engine:

Microsoft launched Bing in an attempt to make life difficult for Google. Not surprisingly, it is not working out so well, at least not at the moment. The main problem is that the search engine boom has been almost exclusively handed to Google, and they wasted no time in taking advantage. In fact, the word “search” has seemed to have disappeared from the English/Tech language, and users worldwide are referring to the daily process as “Googling”. That results in a clear advantage in Google’s favor leaving very little room for maneuver, especially with the regular users’ lack of interest in exploring the different options – people just want to get to what they’re looking for in the quickest and easiest manner. Consequently, you might come across those who advocate the phrase “I love Google!”, as oppose to “I love the Internet”, giving credit to the technology giants for the actual content offered via the Web, not just the process of finding it.

Filtering the huge majority of search queries via a single search engine can be very dangerous, as it facilitates the process of censorship. Potentially, Google could have the power of controlling what is crawled and visible in the results, and what stay in the dark. Either way, as users of the information super highway, we can always benefit from more competition. Let’s hope the power remains where it belongs: With the people.

What We Know About Google Chrome OS

Google Chrome logo

On the 7th of July, technology giants Google announced that they will release their own Operating System late 2010. It seems like it was nothing more than the worst kept secret of recent times, as there is very little known about it, and nothing will become clear until we near its release in a year’s time.

Having said that, there has been a bit of talk, and this article by Jason Hiner of TechRepublic gives an excellent explanation of what we know about the new OS, and its importance to us (or lack of).

In summary, Google will release an Operating System, like Windows and Mac OS, that is based on the Linux kernal. There are currently hundreds of different Linux distributions available, all free and open-source. Normally, each distro offers something different, or is geared towards a certain audience. In the case of Chrome OS, Google aims to create a very light and fast OS that is targeting netbooks, and is based on the fact that its users do almost everything on the Internet. This means that people will use remote servers to store their data (therefore no need for back-up), and web applications for their daily tasks (meaning less need for any applications to be installed on the local machine).

At the moment it is way too early to tell how successful this project is going to be. But one thing is for sure, and it’s that the consumers can always use more competition, and a new OS (it could be argued that it’s no more than a new distro, but it is still marketed as a new OS) would encourage Microsoft and Apple to constantly improve. Moreover, it could be a point of enthusiasm for Linux-supporters, as it is potentially the entrance to the Linux globe for regular users world-wide.

Piwik: Open Source Web Analytics

The Piwik Analytics' Logo

More and more web applications are being made available for download for users to place on their own server. One of the latest products of the beautiful open-source globe is Piwik: an online application that brings you all of the detailed statistics regarding your website’s visitors. Tracking the visitors to a given website is a crucial measurement of success/failure, and is the base of most of the decisions that are made.

While there are a number of web applications that can provide you with such information, Piwik is complete free and open-source. More importantly, it is hosted on your own server, giving you complete control, and freedom to alter however you see fit.

The Piwik Dashboard

For starters, the Ajax-driven dashboard is very intuitive and easy to use. You can select which widgets you want to see on the first page, and in what order. That’s because the Piwik team have made the realization that analytics’ users would want to access the admin panel very frequently, but would rarely go after small, relatively-insignificant details. That, within itself, is a demonstration of how the level of usability of open-source products is always superior to commercial counterparts – with so many volunteers, you’re bound to have something that pleases everyone.

Moreover, after the unprecedented success of the Firefox extensions’ concept, Piwik is developed to allow for plugins built by the community, meaning that the sky is the limit, as far as the features are concerned. The script ships with some of the basic plugins that you would be using.

Some of the unique features include the ability to see the Outlinks, showing how the visitors exited the websites, as well as the Downloads, which reveals the files that the users have downloaded off your website. Not to mention an extensive referrers’ section that indicates whether the users arrived via direct entry, another website, or a search engine (and in all three cases, giving all of the associated details).

Why use Piwik and not Google Analytics?

Many administrators rely on Google Analytics for visitors’ statistics, but Piwik’s edge is very clear:

1. Piwik is free and open-source, Google have the right to go commercial when they feel like it
2. Piwik is hosted on your server, and it’s not going anywhere. While Google can start bombarding you with ads if they feel like it, or limit your access
3. It’s important to keep your statistics private. When Google know everything there is about your visitors and have the right to use that information. They can shape the AdSense market, because they’ll know what people are looking for, and can therefore control pricing, making everyone pay more for keywords. However, when it’s on your server, Google have less control over ad pricing
4. Piwik is a lot easier to use, a lot more light-weight. More importantly, the future is a lot brighter, thanks to the plugins’ infrastructure.

Using Piwik is extremely easy. Just go to http://piwik.org, download the latest version, upload it to a directory on your server (for example: www.yourwebsite.com/piwik), point your browser to that directoy, and follow the on-screen instructions. You will need PHP and MySQL on your server, which are available in 99% of all hosts. After that, copy the code snippet into all of the pages of your website, and watch the magic.

If you’re using WordPress, install Piwik and use the WP-Piwik plugin that automatically places a valid code in all parts of the website.

We are now moving out of the “open-source alternative” era, and into the “an obviously better choice, regardless of the fact that it’s open-source” realm.

The Great Firewall of China

Seemingly not satisfied with censoring major websites like Facebook, YouTube and Wikipedia, the Chinese government has ordered all PCs sold in the country to have a pre-configured software installed that would block all websites with pornographic content or language. Starting Juy 1st, anyone purchasing a new PC will have his hands tied, thanks to “Green Dam Youth Escort”, the latest technology that the Chinese government has been working on for years. In fact, they have deployed a special “Internet Police” body of more than 30,000 officers to ensure fluidity and compliance with orders.

China's Internet censored

Very few people would be willing to make a big fuss about the censorship of adult content, for various reasons. Firstly, many conservative families would actually like to prevent their children from accessing disturbing content. Secondly, no one would be proud of defending pornography, that would say many things about you that you wouldn’t like people to think. Moreover, with so many problems and human rights’ violations throughout the People’s Republic of China and beyond, there are more important things to worry about (such as basic daily needs), and there have been too many failures (According to Amnesty International, China has the largest recorded number of imprisoned journalists and cyber-dissidents in the world), so you wouldn’t want to mess with the authorities.

However, this is not an issue of pornography, it’s much bigger than that. The fact that the Chinese government can track the sites visited by every single person, and the fact that they now have the ability to censor any website whatsoever, makes the only free method of communication ever to exist almost completely impotent. It is a clear attempt to isolate the Chinese population from accessing information from the rest of the planet, and this will inevitably lead to dire consequences. While many governments are not fully aware of the power that the people posses thanks to the Internet, the Chinese authorities have done their homework and are taking all of the necessary measures to ensure totalitarianism.

What many do not realize, however, is that the Chinese government would’ve never succeeded in censoring and filtering internet access if it wasn’t for the helping hands from some of the American corporations. Google, for one, is a prime example of a company that claims to follow a certain philosophy, but acts hypocritically. Thus, while Google.com is censored, Google.cn is publicly accessible throughout mainland China. That is because Google were kind enough to offer the service of providing the Chinese with a stripped-down, filtered version of the original search engine.

As stubborn as they may be, there is very little the Chinese government can do to maintain the inevtiable explansion of the web. Sooner or later, the leackage cracks will be to big to handle, and the power will be restored to the real owners: the people.