WebProNews

Tag: united states

  • The Internet Is Slowly Getting Faster Around The World

    With the advent of Google Fiber in Kansas City, we’re all now wanting a world with faster Internet. The traditional ISPs in the U.S. are slowly expanding their services, but some may think that they’re not moving fast enough. There’s also the issue of consumers in the U.S. paying way too much for much too little.

    While there is little consolation for our Internet woes, there is some hope in the form of a new study from Akamai. The company published “The State of the Internet Report” and the findings are pretty interesting. The study looks at how the Internet has grown in the world, and in the U.S., in the first quarter of 2012.

    In a bit of sad opening news, the U.S. is not even in the top 10 of global average Internet speeds. The average speed in the U.S. is a paltry 6.7 Mbps. South Korea is obviously the winner with an average speed of 15.7 Mbps. The U.S. shouldn’t feel too bad though as our average speed is actually up 29 percent year-over-year. South Korea’s speed is only up 9.4 percent year-over-year, and actually down 1.5 percent quarter-over-quarter.

    The U.S. fairs much better when looking at the peak Internet speeds. The U.S. is in eighth place with a peak speed of 28.7 Mbps. Hong Kong takes the top spot this time with a peak speed of 49.3 Mbps. South Korea is not far behind though with a peak speed of 47.8 Mbps. It’s important to note that the U.S. is once again growing in this area with 35 percent growth year-over-year.

    The best news for the U.S. is the growth of high broadband, which Akimai defines as having a connection of 10 Mbps or higher. Fifteen percent of U.S. citizens are at that high broadband mark which doesn’t seem like much. The growth tells an entirely different story, however, with 95 percent growth year-over-year. Unfortunately, South Korea has to win again with 53 percent of their citizens being at high broadband. Their growth is also higher at 97 percent year-over-year.

    Things get really interesting when you look at the U.S. on a state-by-state basis. Delaware has the fastest average speed in the country with an average of 10.2 Mbps. That’s an increase of 58 percent year-over-year. Washington state brings up the rear with an average speed of 7.9 Mbps.

    Delaware leads the pack again in peak connection speeds of 43.4 Mbps. It’s an increase of 44 percent year-over-year. Unlike the global peak connection speeds, there is no real correlation to the average connection speeds. Much of the peak connection speeds actually come from the Northeast with states like Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Massachusetts making up most of the list.

    The Northeast wins again when it comes to the adoption of high broadband. Delaware is the winner again with 33 percent of its citizens having access to Internet at 10 Mbps or higher. The rest of the list is populated by Northeastern states except for Washington state bringing up the rear with 21 percent adoption.

    As for regular broadband adoption of over 4 Mbps, the Northeast is the winner again. An amazing 92 percent of Delaware residents have Internet over 4 Mbps with the lowest being only 68 percent in the District of Columbia. The growth at this point is slower though with Delaware only seeing growth of 14 percent year-over-year.

    So what does this all mean? The Internet is getting faster around the world. The U.S. is actually increasing its average speed by a lot, but there’s still a lot of work to be done. It’s pretty pitiful that nobody outside of the Northeast, sans Washington state, is represented in the state breakdown.

    Regardless, it’s a good sign that the Internet and speed are both growing throughout the U.S. and the world. It may not be growing as fast as we want it to, but it’s there. If Google brings Fiber outside of Kansas City, the U.S. might be able to better compete with the world. It will at least be interesting to see if Kansas or Missouri shows up on this report once Google Fiber launches. A few thousand homes with 1 Gbps connections might help even the odds.

    If you want to see the report in full with breakdowns of all the major global markets, check out the study on Akimai’s Web site. It should be pointed out that they do require you to register with them to check out the study.

  • You Pay Far Too Much For Internet And That’s A Problem

    The Internet has become a staple of modern communication. While some people use the Internet to watch funny cat videos on YouTube, it’s importance can not be understated for the millions of global citizens who use it to share important information about their world with others. The Internet can be credited with the success of the Arab Spring and the U.N. even announced the Internet as a basic human right. So why does a basic human right cost so much in the U.S. when other countries get faster Internet for far less?

    To understand this question, we have to look at a multitude of factors that range from local monopolies to lack of proper infrastructure. it’s a multi-faceted problem with not a lot of solutions out there. There are some companies, like Google, and cities who are trying to win back the Internet for the people instead of making it the luxury that many ISPs treat it as now.

    How much do you pay for Internet? Do you find the prices to be exploitative? Let us know in the comments.

    Chances are you live in a city that’s serviced by the one of the big ISPs like Comcast, Time Warner Cable or Verizon. How much do you pay for Internet? According to the White Fence Index, the average cost of Internet among top U.S. cities is $38 a month. Compare that to a country like South Korea where ADSL premium, which blows our best Internet out of the water, is only 30,000 won ($26) a month.

    So why do we pay more for inferior Internet? Well, you could argue that the infrastructure is much larger in the U.S. and therefore requires more money to fund which leads to higher prices. That’s certainly somewhat true, but it also comes down to how much importance is placed on the Internet.

    South Korea is such an Internet powerhouse because their government has invested heavily in expanding the Internet and their citizen’s access to it. The U.S. has a similar plan that was created with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 that was passed in response to the global economic crisis that began in 2008. The plan, kickstarted by the FCC, is called the National Broadband Plan. It’s goal is to give every American “robust, affordable Internet.”

    So what’s this National Broadband Plan? Here’s the four step process the FCC has in place:

  • Design policies to ensure robust competition and, as a result maximize consumer welfare, innovation and investment.
  • Ensure efficient allocation and management of assets government controls or influences, such as spectrum, poles, and rights-of-way, to encourage network upgrades and competitive entry.
  • Reform current universal service mechanisms to support deployment of broadband and voice in high-cost areas; and ensure that low-income Americans can afford broadband; and in addition, support efforts to boost adoption and utilization.
  • Reform laws, policies, standards and incentives to maximize the benefits of broadband in sectors government influences significantly, such as public education, health care and government operations.

    • If successful, the FCC hopes that this plan will bring the U.S. Internet into the 21st century. Their long term goal is to make sure that at least “100 million homes should have affordable access to actual download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and actual upload speeds of at least 50 megabits per second.”

    Do you think the FCC’s plan for affordable 100Mbps downstream is feasible? Let us know in the comments.

    My local ISP offers up to 50Mbps downloads speeds for $95 a month. I’m paying $60 for only 30Mbps a month. As you can see, my ISP is not quite there and only a few are. For those who are at those speeds, the cost is quite outrageous. Verizon’s FiOS service ,which puts out speeds from 15Mbps to 300Mbps, costs anywhere between $65 to $210 per month just for Internet. That’s not quite what affordable means. Thankfully, there are efforts on the part from companies like Google and local governments to bring affordable, fast fiber at a low price to consumers.

    We brought you word on Wednesday that Google was about to unveil their new Fiber network in Kansas City. Google Fiber is somewhat of an experiment on Google’s part to see how affordable, yet cheap, Internet can impact innovation and competitiveness in the ISP market.

    Google Fiber will be launching on July 26 and it has ISPs scared. There was the humorous story from last week that saw Time Warner Cable offering rewards to anybody who would spy on Google’s efforts to bring Fiber to the city. Google hasn’t come out and said they want to be an ISP, but people certainly see it that way. The company’s purchase of dark fiber in 2006, while being used to connect data centers, was certainly viewed as Google eyeing the consumer Internet market.

    The experiment in Kansas City might be a failure though. It might convince Google to stay out of the consumer market and stick to providing Internet services. The promise of cheap Internet at faster speeds, however, makes that scenario highly unlikely. In fact, Google is probably onto something here. If the city can afford it, they’re going to start providing cheaper Internet to their citizens as well.

    One such city in Colorado is already on their way. The city of Longmont is now in discussion to start selling Internet to local businesses. It could be extended to over 1,000 homes as well. While some people would deride government intervening and competing with businesses, the citizens of the city don’t seem to mind. In fact, over 57 percent of those at the city council meeting voted to start construction on the fiber network immediately.

    The one thing we must keep in mind is price. Google and Longmont have both stayed away from the issue of price since these plans were announced. They promise that the speeds will be faster and cheaper than the competition, but by how much? It obviously has the ISPs spooked, but we just don’t know how scared they should be.

    In a perfect world, Google will thrown down the gauntlet on July 26. A move that will force Time Warner to lower their prices in Kansas City which will then have a rippling effect across the country as more ISPs lower their prices to deal with the demand from consumers for affordable Internet.

    Unfortunately, we don’t live in a perfect world. It’s going to take more competition from Google and the expansion of fiber to really drive down prices in the U.S. Longmont had to specifically vote down a law that prevented the city from offering Internet to its citizens. Other cities and states have similar laws that would need to be amended before such actions could take place.

    It really all comes down to how people view the Internet in the U.S. The U.N. obviously sees it as a human right, but many people still see it as a luxury. You can argue that one doesn’t need the Internet, but that only hampers progress. We’re only going to start seeing real results once people decide to see the Internet as a commodity instead of a luxury. Google and Longmont are leading the charge to that future.

    Do you think that Google and local cities should become ISPs? Will it drive prices down and speeds up? Let us know in the comments.

  • Kim Dotcom Won’t Know His Fate Until Next Year

    The Megaupload case is going to do down in history, one way or another, as one of the defining moments of global copyright law and enforcement. The historic extradition case would have gone down next month in the New Zealand court, but we won’t know anything until March 2013.

    New Zealand’s Stuff is reporting that Dotcom’s lawyer and Crown lawyers representing the US government both agreed to the delay. In a perfect world, this would be good news for Dotcom who needs time to construct a defense and fight the charges that have been brought against him. The Megaupload founder doesn’t see it that way though.

    Time would indeed do the rest as Dotcom still does not have access to most of his assets. His lawyers are essentially working for free at the moment. You can bet Dotcom will be paying them a huge bonus if he wins the case and has his assets reinstated.

    Stuff also reports that the U.S. revealed during the delay hearing that they will appeal any orders to have evidence returned to Dotcom. They even threatened to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. If the New Zealand court system is anything like America’s, he might not get to see that evidence for a very long time.

    If you recall, New Zealand District Court Judge David Harvey ordered the FBI to return all evidence they have against Dotcom. The threat of appeal makes it so that the evidence they currently have will remain out of the public eye until the appeals can work their way up through the Supreme Court or if Dotcom is extradited to the U.S.

    At this point, it seems that the U.S. is waging a war of attrition against Dotcom. One can assume that their hope is that he just gives up and goes quietly. If the U.S. has been watching his Twitter feed, however, they would know that he’s going to do everything but go quietly. He has become somewhat of an Internet hero and has taken up the expectations that comes with the label. The Megaupload case isn’t over by a long shot and we’ll continue to hear more throughout the rest of the year.

  • Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare 5-4 (Court Document Enclosed)

    In what is sure to be a hotpoint in this political cycle and maybe even the next few years, the Supreme Court of the United States of America upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act with a 5-4 split decision vote. This act, better known as Obamacare, was an act that was meant to reel in rising medical costs in the United States by making healthcare a mandatory purchase for every American.

    Chief Justice Roberts was joined by Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor in upholding the mandate. Chief Justice Roberts wrote in his opinion that “the most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power. It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1.”

    To have Chief Justice Roberts take the side of the President was widely unexpected, as the only “wild card” as far as most people were concerned was Justice Kennedy.

    There was one part of the law that was struck down. The vast expansion of Medicaid was voted down because the “federal government cannot penalize states for not participating in the new program by withholding existing Medicaid funds.”

    This decision is sure to put the anti-Obamamcare camp into overdrive, and Mitt Romney is sure to use it as a rallying cry to get his camp firmly behind him. On the pro Obama side, he now has his signature piece of legislation validated, and he will go into the election on a high note.

    The official opinion released by the Supreme Court is below:

    Supreme Court

    Twitter of course is having mixed reactions:

  • Jimmy Wales Pens Petition to Halt Richard O’Dwyer’s Absurd Extradition to U.S.

    Earlier this year, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales added instrumental support in the internet’s successful fight against the U.S. government-backed Twin Bills of Terrible known as SOPA and PIPA. For his second act, Wales is hoping he can once again use the internet to galvanize supporters in both the public and the government to take up the cause of U.K. student Richard O’Dwyer’s impending extradition to the United States.

    Richard O’Dwyer, 24, if you recall, was arrested in November 2010 in London on charges that his website, TVShack.net, was violating copyright law because it hosted links to pirated TV shows and movies – just links, mind you, and not the actual content. Although O’Dwyer has never lived in the United States and none of his servers were hosted in the United States, a U.K. judge nonetheless ruled that O’Dwyer should be extradited to the United States to stand trial. The charges against O’Dwyer carry a (jaw-dropping) maximum of ten-year sentence.

    Anonymous has already targeted the website of the U.K Home Office as a response to (among other reasons) O’Dwyer’s impending extradition to the U.S. More personally, O’Dwyer’s own mother has spoken out against the United State’s imminent domain-like seizure or her son and the site he ran, calling on activists to save the internet from the U.S.

    Wales met with O’Dwyer earlier this month and subsequently created a petition on change.org yesterday to further increase awareness of O’Dwyer’s extradition. Wales’ petition was released concurrently with an opinion piece in the Guardian. In both pieces, Wales makes an impassioned plea for support from the internet as well as reason from the government bodies that are currently threatening O’Dwyer’s quality of life.

    The internet as a whole must not tolerate censorship in response to mere allegations of copyright infringement. As citizens we must stand up for our rights online.

    When operating his site, Richard O’Dwyer always did his best to play by the rules: on the few occasions he received requests to remove content from copyright holders, he complied. His site hosted links, not copyrighted content, and these were submitted by users.

    Copyright is an important institution, serving a beneficial moral and economic purpose. But that does not mean that copyright can or should be unlimited. It does not mean that we should abandon time-honoured moral and legal principles to allow endless encroachments on our civil liberties in the interests of the moguls of Hollywood.

    Richard O’Dwyer is the human face of the battle between the content industry and the interests of the general public. Earlier this year, in the fight against the anti-copyright bills SOPA and PIPA, the public won its first big victory. This could be our second.

    Wales is right to stand up for O’Dwyer but it’s a shame that additional persuasive ambassadors of the internet have not come forward to support O’Dwyer’s case. Wales accurately compares O’Dwyer’s site to Google in that it merely provides a space for people to post links to videos that are hosted somewhere else on the internet. Google has argued a similar defense of its online video service, YouTube, in that it cannot be responsible for what the users of the service upload (although YouTube is actually hosting real content as opposed to mere links that forward users to other sites). Google has even proffered its two cents in similar piracy cases, such as it did earlier this year by submitting an amicus brief in the Motion Picture Association of America’s lawsuit against Hotfile, a file-sharing site.

    If Google believes that it is lawfully protected by the “safe-harbor” provision provided by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and that Hotfile is likewise protected, there’s no reason why O’Dwyer shouldn’t be protected by the same provision (nor is there any reason why Google couldn’t make another interjection in O’Dwyer’s case the way it did with the Hotfile case).

    In the meantime, hats of to Jimmy Wales for helping broaden the attention on Richard O’Dwyer’s nigh-Kafkaesque legal nightmare.

    As of writing this, Wales’ petition to the UK Home Secretary has collected 28,353 signatures (it actually increased nearly 2,000 in the time it took me to write this article) of the 35,000-signature goal.

  • Move Over Planes, Trains Are Making A Comeback

    I am absolutely terrified of planes. The idea of being hurtled through the air at hundreds of miles per hour in a giant steel coffin does not sit well with me. That’s why I’m all for trains making a comeback and it looks like they are.

    The Web Urbanist reports that the U.S. and Russia just inked a deal that would build a tunnel under the ocean in the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia. It would connect with pre-existing railways and allow the countries to transport freight between the two without the use of planes or boats.

    Bering Strait

    Planes, Trains and Bering Strait

    The project will reportedly cost about $100 billion. That’s a lot of money, money that a lot of countries can’t just go spending on awesome, but initially unnecessary, projects like this. The two countries were apparently able to justify the cost since projections put the tunnel at being able to transport 100 million tons of freight a year.

    While the initial use will be used for industrial uses, it’s not too far fetched to imagine it also being used for passengers. While some people would obviously be more inclined to fly over the ocean, I’m sure the Pteromerhanophobics (including myself) would be more than happy to take a train ride under the ocean. Considering that bullet trains can now hit speeds of about 200 mph, it wouldn’t take that much longer to reach international destinations.

    Besides, underwater tunnels are just the first step to installing evacuated tube transports for 4,000 mph speeds across the ocean floor. Technology is going back to trains so that we can all travel like the folks in Futurama.

  • Israel, U.S. Team Up To Create Flame Computer Virus

    Back in the mid-2000’s The need to start to keep Iran’s nuclear goals in check was obvious. So the United States, led by George Bush, and Israel started to develop a massive piece of malware that secretly mapped and monitored Iran’s computer networks, sending back a steady stream of intelligence to prepare for a cyber­warfare campaign. This virus, called Flame, is believed to be the first sustained campaign of cyber-sabotage against an adversary of the United States.

    “This is about preparing the battlefield for another type of covert action,” said one former high-ranking U.S. intelligence official, who added that Flame and Stuxnet were elements of a broader assault that continues today. “Cyber-collection against the Iranian program is way further down the road than this.”

    The Flame virus was first revealed last month when Iranian officials detected a cyber attack on its oil refineries. The United States was not too happy that Israel decided to launch this phase of their attack without notifying American officials. In doing so they have effectively wiped out a virus that has been quietly doing its job for 5 plus years.

    The Flame virus seems to be a precursor to the now infamous Stuxnet virus that directly effected almost 1,000 centrifuges and caused them to spin out of control. The damage occurred gradually, over months, and Iranian officials initially thought it was the result of incompetence.

    “The scale of the espionage and sabotage effort is proportionate to the problem that’s trying to be resolved,” the former intelligence official said. “Although Stuxnet and Flame infections can be countered, it doesn’t mean that other tools aren’t in play or performing effectively.”

    It is not yet clear the extent of the United Staes’ involvement in the development in making the virus, but it is believed that the U.S. relied on its 2 top spy agencies: The C.I.A. and the N.S.A.. The NSA, known mainly for its electronic eavesdropping and code-breaking capabilities, has extensive expertise in developing malicious code that can be aimed at U.S. adversaries, including Iran. The CIA lacks the NSA’s sophistication in building malware but is deeply involved in the execution of the cyber-campaign.

    The disruptions from the Americans and Israelis has led the Iranians to ask a Russian security firm and a Hungarian cyber-lab for help.

    So it looks as though any questions about Iran’s true intentions are already known by our government because this virus has been sending back info for years. The U.S. will know the day Iran gains the ability to build a nuclear weapon and they will put a stop to it.

  • U.N. Trying To Take Control Of Internet U.S. Warns

    In what has been a rarity during an election year, bi-partisan government officials have warned that a December summit by the World Conference on International Telecommunications is hearing proposals by China, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia to try to take control of the internet.

    The summit will review a set of telecommunications regulations established in 1988 and will propose the U.N. establish an new “information security” regime or create an alternative to ICANN. “These are terrible ideas,” Rep. Fred Upton said in a house hearing. This opens up the doors for countries with a weak appreciation of free speech and civil liberties like Russia and China to further oppress their citizens.

    This proposal has the ability to drastically effect the way we all use the internet unless the United States can effectively block it. If the US cant block it, they “just might break the Internet by subjecting it to an international regulatory regime designed for old-fashioned telephone service,” Rep. Greg Walden(R) from Oregon said.

    The ball in in the United States court being as they are one of the 5 permanent members of the UN Security council and have veto rights over any measure that goes through the system. They will however rely on some of their allies to keep the internet free from this, with Japan, Canada, Mexico, and many European countries on their side.

  • United Nations’ Proposal To Regulate Internet Going Before House This Week

    It seems that everybody wants a hand in the massive cookie jar known as the Internet. The latest group that wants some form of control over the Internet is the United Nations. I don’t need to tell you how bad of an idea that is and it seems that our government finally agrees with the Internet on something.

    The House of Representatives will be examining the proposal this week. According to The Hill, the UN backed proposal is already supported by China, Russia, Brazil and other countries that would benefit greatly from being able to control the Internet. If there’s one thing that we’ve learned, it’s that the U.S. hates it when foreign countries try to control the Internet.

    Thankfully, our government doesn’t seem to like this proposed regulation. The Hill has found that a majority of congressmen from both sides of the political spectrum are against it. It would appear that the Obama administration is also not a fan of letting the UN’s International Telecommunication Union have more of a stake in the way the Internet is run.

    Sen. Marco Rubio was quoted as saying that he’s against letting countries that are “not exactly bastions of Internet freedom” have a stake in the international Internet. He went on to say that countries, like Russia and China, that censor search terms “should not be a leader in international Internet regulatory frameworks.”

    To discuss the issue, the House is inviting several prominent people involved in the workings of the Internet to discuss the proposal. Those invited include Robert McDowell, FCC commissioner; David Gross, former State Department official; and Sally Wentworth, senior manager of public policy at the Internet Society. At face value, it looks like the House has chosen a varied approach when it comes to approaching this particular proposal.

    The main issue at hand is that governments want more control over the Internet. According to The Hill, the UN wants more control to better fight cyber attacks and control how international Internet access is regulated. You can already see how such a proposal is a bad idea. Our own government is already trying to violate its citizens’ privacy by using cybersecurity as an excuse. Just imagine CISPA on a global scale with multiple stakeholders including China trying to control the Internet. You have a recipe for absolute disaster and the destruction of what those working on the Internet have worked hard over the last 30 years to help create.

    The only problem is that the U.S. is not the only nation in the UN. There are unfortunately far more nations that would presumably love to control the Internet than countries that support the current non-government organization approach. The UN proposal could come up vote as soon as December when it meets in Dubai. We’ll keep you updated on this latest assault on Internet freedom.

  • Facebook Isn’t The Best When It Comes To Marriage

    Facebook is great for a lot of things – catching up with old friends, discussing topics with like-minded individuals and following your favorite celebrities. It’s not so great when it comes to marriage though.

    Back in January, a survey found that over 30 percent of all divorces in the U.K. mentioned Facebook in the filings. From that survey, we could gather that the openness Facebook brings with it is not good for marriage. Sure, society tells us that we should never keep secrets from our spouses, but Facebook makes sure that those secrets don’t stay secret for long.

    That was all in the U.K. though. Surely the Internet, specifically Facebook, doesn’t play as large of a role in our divorce-happy nation, right? Unfortunately, Smart Money has found that over 80 percent of divorce attorneys have started to find social networking in their clients’ filing according to a report from the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. Individual lawyers are also coming forward and saying that over half of all cases that submit electronic material as evidence include Facebook.

    So what’s the big deal with Facebook and divorce? It’s the same problem that plagues a lot of stupid people on the social networking site. People think they’re anonymous when on Facebook even when the site clearly displays a lot of identifying and potentially incriminating information. This leads to people posting stupid things like siphoning gas from a cop car. It can also lead to people potentially admitting to an affair or other damning information, like leaving the toilet seat up.

    What could be even worse is that Smart Money has found judges using Facebook posts to determine child custody and alimony. I understand that Facebook offers an extra layer of evidence in determining the competency of a human being, but I hope that it’s not the only thing being used. A lot of posts, at least from me, are full of hyperbole and exaggerated statements that aren’t meant to be taken literally.

    It’s important to remember, however, that Facebook is just one part of the problem. Nothing can save a bad marriage, even when concealing your activities on Facebook. Posting irresponsible content on Facebook that brings your loyalty or maturity into question will not help matters at all.

    Once again, the moral of the story is to always be careful of what you post to Facebook. You never know who is going to see it and it could have disastrous effects. I would also advise you not to obsessively stalk your spouse’s Facebook account. It’s their privacy and they will share it with you if they want. Being suspicious is only going to add undue stress to the relationship.

  • U.S. Government Anti-Piracy System Delayed To Later This Year

    We reported back in February on a plan being implemented by the Center for Copyright Information and major ISPs to stop the rampant problem of file-sharing over BitTorrent. Back then, it was announced that the plan would go into effect on July 1 of this year. It would appear that the original date is going to be missed.

    TorrentFreak is reporting that the CCI told them that the July 1 date was not set in stone and that the date could slip. The problem seems to be stemming from the fact that not all the ISPs are on board yet. The six-strikes plan currently being implemented by the CCI and ISPs is going to take a long time to actively implement. There’s a lot of different things to consider with such a plan especially keeping it consumer friendly as the CCI claims the plan will be.

    The six-strikes plan will see a user found pirating content being sent a warning by their ISP. The warnings will escalate with stricter punishments for subsequent offenses. It’s more about educating consumers on legal alternatives than flat out punishing users. Although, the ISPs do have the power to throttle Internet speeds after a number of offenses. The CCI claims that the ISPs will not be able to completely restrict access, but I wouldn’t take their word for it.

    The CCI also said that they have found a partner to monitor BitTorrent swarms for signs of piracy. They did not say who the partner was, but TorrentFreak speculates that the delay could be due to this partner. As has been proven time and time again, IP addresses are not an accurate method of finding out the physical address of a person. Since BitTorrent users are only identifiable through IP addresses, they need to find a method that doesn’t target legitimate users.

    I think that the current plan being implemented by the CCI is about the best we’ll get if the RIAA and MPAA must have their way. As long as the CCI makes sure to protect the consumer by not taking away their access to the Internet. I think that a warning is going to be enough to sway most people to legal alternatives, but hardcore pirates have their own way of evading detection. We’ll have to see if the partner that the CCI has hired will be able to detect those of us who encrypt our torrents through proxies.

    The six-strike plan should be implemented by the end of the year at the very least. Of course, the CCI said the same thing last year as well and they missed that date. It’s up in the air right now if the CCI and ISPs actually have the reach to monitor the Internet on such a massive scale. I’m very interested to see how they implement such a plan, but their unwillingness to discuss details makes me not very confident in their ability to deliver.

  • Most Computer Users Are Pirates (of Software, not Booty)

    Be honest: how much of that software on your home computer did you really pay for? All of it? Most of it? Maybe just a little? Did you feel the need to hide that disc containing Adobe Photoshop CS6 that your friend gave you so nobody finds the evidence?

    If you answered yes to any of the above, don’t worry – you’re far from alone. A new study from Business Software Alliance reveals that 57% of people who use personal computers admit that they have some pirated software. The study, the 9th Annual BSA Global Software Piracy Study, surveyed 15,000 computer users in 33 countries in January and February of 2012, most of whom don’t pay for all of their software. Globally, the amount of pirated software is valued at $63.4 billion in 2011, up from $58.8 bilion in 2010.

    BSA President and CEO Robert Holleyman doesn’t think that governments are taking software piracy as seriously as they should. “If 57% of consumers admitted they shoplift, authorities would react by increasing police patrols and penalties,” he said. “Software piracy demands a similarly forceful response – concerted public education and vigorous law enforcement.”

    A bold 31% of users gleefully admit that they pirate software “most of the time” or “occasionally,” where another 26% admitted to doing it rarely. Only a shrewd 38% said they “never” take unlicensed software.

    Here, take in this video BSA put together that highlights some of the results from the study.

    The most pirate-likely region of the world is Central and Eastern Europe with a 62% piracy rate. That roughly translates into $3,227,000. However, while that area might have the greatest density of software pirates, by far the largest sink hole of money lost from pirated software is the United States. Incredibly, though, nearly $9.8 billion was lost due to pirated software in the U.S. in 2011 but the piracy rate there was only 19% due to legal software sales of over $41 billion. While China’s total value of pirated software wasn’t far behind the U.S. with $8.9 billion, its piracy rate was towered at 77% because the country only had $2.7 billion in legal software sales. That roughly translates to PC buyers spending only $8.89 on average for legal software.

    Still, the developing world is where piracy is most rampant. The study found that frequent pirates in developing economies install almost four times as much pirated software as do the software pirates in established economies. The piracy rate of emerging economies was 68% whereas first-world economies had a piracy rate of 24%.

    BSA Senior Vice President of Anti-Piracy Jodie Kelley feels that governments need to address the swelling problem of software piracy. “Governments, especially in emerging markets where most of the theft is taking place, must take steps to modernize their IP laws and expand enforcement efforts to ensure that those who pirate software face real consequences,” Kelley said.

    Typically, most of the piracy talk these days seems to revolve around the entertainment industry and the debate over anti-piracy measures typically focus on curbing pirated movies and music. Depending on which study you want to rely on, the total amount of lost revenue from pirated music and movies could range anywhere from $58 billion to as high as $200 billion (although this is said to be a highly inflated). Regardless, Holleyman makes a good point about the response (or lack thereof) from authorities to the plague of software piracy. The amount of money lost on pirated software is a considerable, possibly as much as what is lost from the entertainment industry, and yet the computer software industry doesn’t have nearly the lobbying influence that the entertainment industry does. You hardly even hear about them being invited to the debate.

    You’d think piracy of operating systems or business software would be the more relevant problem than, say, people pirating something as insipid as Suckerpunch.

    Priorities, people. Priorities.

    (Image courtesy of South Park/Comedy Central.)

  • Anonymous Claims To Have Access To U.S.-Owned Classified Databases

    Anonymous Claims To Have Access To U.S.-Owned Classified Databases

    Anonymous has changed a lot in the past few years from ragtag group of hackers to a massive force to be reckoned with. One of its more prolific members, Christopher Doyon, is now on the run from U.S. law enforcement after taking down the county Web site of Santa Cruz, California. He sat down with the National Post to reveal some of the plans that Anonymous has this year.

    The biggest news is that Doyon claims Anonymous has access to “every classified database in the U.S. government.” He tells the National Post that they got this information through informants and civilians, not through hacking or extortion. As Doyon puts it:

    The five-star general (and) the Secretary of Defense who sit in the cushy plush offices at the top of the Pentagon don’t run anything anymore. It’s the pimply-faced kid in the basement who controls the whole game, and Bradley Manning proved that.

    He says that it’s a matter of when, not if, when it comes to Anonymous leaking this information to the general public. They have already assisted with a massive leak this year when they took part in the Wikileaks campaign that saw private information from Stratfor revealed to the public.

    As for the other interesting parts of the interview, Doyor claims that there is a new “underground railroad” with safehouses running through Canada for hacktivists and other Anonymous members on the run. They are apparently able to do this through the help of contacts from within the Canadian government. He and others probably can’t stay for long, however, as Canada will only provide limited support for the short term. He is in talks with “several countries in Europe” to set up a permanent political asylum for hacktivists like himself.

    Finally, Doyon explains the concept behind being a leader in a leaderless organization like Anonymous. He says that the collective doesn’t choose leaders. The people who speak for Anonymous and those that are looked up to are the ones who devote their lives to the cause. He says that most members of Anonymous can’t commit the 12 hours a day to Anonymous like he does, and that’s fine. His role is to give operations to the “IT guy or a cable installer with a few hours to spare.”

    The rest of the interview deals with the protests in Canada alongside what the relationship between hacktivists and law enforcement. It’s a fascinating read and one of the few moments where we get to see what’s really going on behind the masks. The guys running the Twitter accounts can unfortunately only say so much.

  • Google Summer Of Code Gets Over 1,000 Student Participants

    Now that summer has begun for all those kids still in college, it’s high time to find a summer job. If you’re a programmer or developer in college, chances are you already have that summer job. Google Summer of Code exploded this year with over 1,000 students representing countries from all around the world.

    In its eighth year running, Summer of Code saw the highest number of applications and applicants all vying for a coveted spot with one of the 180 organizations, including Twitter, that are offering programming internships this summer. Google received 6,685 applications from 4,258 students representing 98 countries.

    Unfortunately, not everybody can make it, but a large number of them did. In fact, this year saw more students being accepted than ever before. There are 1,212 students from 69 countries participating in this year’s Summer of Code.

    India is at the top spot this year with 227 students having been accepted in the program. The United States is in second with 172 students. German is in third with 72 students. The rest of the students came from a variety of other countries including Russia, China, Poland, Sri Lanka, Romania, France, Canada and more.

    Google makes special note of a student from Mauritius being accepted into the program, a first for the small African nation. It just proves that programming is starting to be accepted and proliferate throughout the world. Like art and music, code is a universal language that can tie people together.

    In other fantastic news, this year set a new record for the number of women accepted into the program. Out of the 1,212 students accepted this year, 8.3 percent identified themselves as women. That’s up from 7.1 percent last year. Here’s hoping that number can get above 10 percent next year. We need more women in computer science and programs like this are perfect for fostering that kind of interest early on.

    The next update will see Google breaking down students by university. I hope my Alma Mater, the University of Kentucky, will be proudly representing this year. They have a fantastic computer science program that doesn’t get enough credit for all the awesome work they do.

  • Obama Criticizing Marine Faces Disciplinary Panel

    Sergent Gary Stein faced a disciplinary panel which by all accounts has suggested that he be discharged from the Marine Corps. with an “other than honorable” discharge. The findings of the 13-hour hearing and an hour of deliberation will be presented to Brigadier General Daniel Yoo, the commanding general of the Marine Corps Recruiting Depot, where Stein is stationed. He is expected to make a decision within 30 days, according to Major Mike Armistead, a Marine Corps spokesman.

    The entire controversy comes from posting on Facebook where Sgt. Stein referred to President Barack Obama as the enemy and said that he would refuse any orders from the commander-in-chief. This is not the first time that he has done this. In 2010, he got in similar trouble with the Marine Corps and was advised to post a disclaimer that the Armed Forces Tea Party is not affiliated with the Armed Forces.

    Saul Gonzalez formKCRW interviewed the Sergent and this is what he had to say:

    So as you can see from the interview, he has no remorse for the things he has said, nor should he. He also needs to realize that the things that he has said cannot and will not be tolerated in the military. You do not criticize your senior officers let alone the highest ranking military member, the President of the United States. One of the reasons the U.S. military is the most successful and feared fighting forces in the world is their ability to fight for the flag on their shoulder and not the person who is giving the orders. As soon as the military starts to allow dissent amongst it’s members, the cohesive fighting force that we all know and love will cease to exist and America will no longer be able to project it’s influence and power.

    (image)@TeriFigueroaNCT
    Teri Figueroa    ACLU atty argues that attempt to boot Sgt. Gary Stein will have a chilling effect on all Marines regarding free speech issues.(image) 4 days ago via Twitter for Android ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    (image)@paulgalloshow
    Paul Gallo    Should Marine Sgt. Gary Stein be kicked out Marines? He called Obama “the domestic enemy.” Said he would not follow some orders from Obama.(image) 3 hours ago via web ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

    (image)@LakeOconeeBldr
    gordon    Dear Prez, Quit worrying about whether the Masters should admit women and call Sgt. Gary Stein and offer your support for free speech. ME(image) 3 days ago via web ·  Reply ·  Retweet ·  Favorite · powered by @socialditto

  • Fact: UK Internet Users Actually Pronounce “Search” As “Google”

    Fact: UK Internet Users Actually Pronounce “Search” As “Google”

    Experian Hitwise pointed out yesterday that UK internet users’ visits to search engines is sustaining a massive growth rate. Year-on-year, there was an 8.7% increase in visits to search engines when comparing February 2012 and February 2011 and the trend appears to set to continue next month.

    One thing I immediately noticed about the visits to search engines in the United Kingdom is that “search engine” might as well be spelled G-O-O-G-L-E. Last month, Google netted 91.57% of all searches, up from 90.64% in January 2012. That market share for Google is up from last year at the same time by .89%. The nearest competitor to Google is Microsoft, whose sites (like Bing) amassed a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it 3.69% of the search market. Yahoo claimed 2.58% and after that, remaining people who didn’t use those three search sites went back to using two aluminum cans connected with a piece of twine.

    Comparatively, Google’s market share of online search in the United States isn’t quite that dominant for February 2012 but it’s still unquestionably commanding at 66.4%. Laying claim to two-thirds of the search market is still an amazing take but it’s nowhere near the absolute monopoly Google has on search in the UK.

    Google isn’t eating most of the search pie in the UK so much as its gobbling up all of it and leaving Microsoft and Yahoo to bicker over the crumbs left cooling on the placemat. Microsoft is slowly carving out a piece of the search market for itself in the United States, but its virtually non-existant in the UK. So why is Google so much more dominant in the UK, I wonder.

    James Murray, a marketing research analyst with Experian Hitwise, spoke with me about why Google has achieved such an irresistible dominance in the search market. Turns out it really might be as simple as pointing to Google’s unrivaled quality in producing reliable search results.

    “In the UK at least Google has held over a 90% share of the search market for at least the last five years,” Murray said. “What’s amazing is that Google managed to achieve such a dominant place in the UK search market with no discernible advertising or marketing. It achieved its status by being the best in its field, offering the most relevant information and by word of mouth.”

    Murray also notes that Google’s achievement has been so convincing that it’s changed the vernacular related to internet search.

    “Google has just become synonymous with search, so much so that we’ve created a verb around its brand name,” he added. “When you want to find information online, you Google it, that’s how powerful the brand is.”

    That much is true no matter what side of the Atlantic you find yourself on. As for why Google has been verbified to denote the act of conducting an internet search in the UK? Maybe it’s just more fun to say with a British tongue. Regardless, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone in the UK that uses Bing or Yahoo to search the internet.

  • U.S. Pirate Party Announces First Conference

    U.S. Pirate Party Announces First Conference

    You may or may not be aware of the Pirate Party, the political group founded in Europe that fights for online freedoms and privacy rights, but they are a very real political party. They have not had much of a presence in the United States, but that’s about to change.

    On the official blog for the Massachusetts Pirate Party, the group has announced the first U.S. conference will take place on March 10. It will take place at the Democracy Center in Cambridge.

    The party has released the schedule of speakers and topics that interested parties may want to attend:

    David House, a researcher at MIT who helped set up the Bradley Manning Support Network, will be giving a talk entitled: Going toe-to-toe with the state: navigating the challenges of a digital activist.

    Shauna Gordon-McKeon, organizer for the Boston Sunlight Foundation, will talk about some of the programming projects transparency activists are using to open up government data.

    Writer and publisher Cecilia Tan, Shane Bugbee and composer Matthew Davidson will be on the Tales from the Net: Making a living at being creative panel.

    Michael Anderson will give a talk called Fight Ridiculous With Ridiculous: The Guerrilla Tactics of Fair Use.

    Also, Conor Sherman will give a talk called Stranger Danger: Don’t Click that Link Even If They Offer Puppies and Candy.

    Finally, we will have a number of talks by Pirate Party members, including:

    Exploring Kopimism by Lauren Pespisa

    Patents Upending by Erik Zoltan

    Fair Use for Activists by Chris Walsh

    How to Run for Office by James O’Keefe

    The event will also serve as a chance for the Pirate Party to discuss where they should go next. The party is still relatively new around the world, but even more so in the United States.

    They are also looking for people to help them with supplies and volunteering.

    Those interested in attending can register online now for only $5.

  • Senate Introduces Global Cybercrime Enforcement Bill

    The U.S. is trying to dabble in policing the Internet again, but in a vastly different way. Meet S.1469 or the International Cybercrime Reporting and Cooperation Act.

    The bill was introduced recently into the Senate by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. It’s goal is “to require reporting on the capacity of foreign countries to combat cybercrime, to develop action plans to improve the capacity of certain countries to combat cybercrime, and for other purposes.” What are those other purposes? Let’s read the proposed bill and find out!

    After the introduction and definitions of various parts of the bill, it gets into what the bill is all about. Section three is called the “Annual Report” and it requires the head of whatever new Federal agency is made to combat cybercrime to report to Congress. They are to report on “the extent and nature of activities relating to cybercrime that are attributable to persons or property based in the country and impact the United States Government, United States persons, or United States electronic commerce.” They are also to report on the “effectiveness of the laws” and “measures taken by the government to protect consumers from cybercrime.”

    Section four, titled “Utilization of Foreign Assistance Programs” deals with how the U.S. will cooperate with foreign countries in battling cybercrime. The bill says that the President will give priority to improving “the effectiveness and capacity of the legal and judicial systems and the capabilities of law enforcement agencies with respect to cybercrime.”

    The countries that will receive the most aid are those that the U.S. determines to have “a low capacity to combat cybercrime.”

    The bill would also let the U.S. provide foreign countries with the tools to improve “critical infrastructure, telecommunications systems, financial industry, legal or judicial systems, or law enforcement capabilities of that country” to combat cybercrime.

    Section five, titled “Action Plans for Combating Cybercrimes for Countries of Cyber Concern” says that after the report mentioned in section two is made to Congress that the President must create an action plan that will assist “the government of that country to improve the capacity of the country to combat cybercrime.”

    There is also a provision that says the President will have to reassess the countries that have been placed under action plans. Countries may be removed and placed on action plans at will if they cease or become countries of “cyber concern.”

    The President will be required, under section five, to meet with the leaders of each country of “cyber concern” to formulate action plans to combat cybercrime.

    If a country fails to meet an action plan benchmark, which is one year after the action plan has been developed, the U.S. is given three courses of action to punish the country into complying with its request – block any new financing or loans for the countries in question, restrict trade to the countries in question and restrict foreign assistance.

    Thankfully, there is an exception that states “the President may not suspend, restrict, prohibit, or withdraw assistance … that is provided for humanitarian or disaster relief or for projects related to building capacity or actions to combat cybercrime.”

    The President is allowed to waive the requirement of an action plan if the President “determines that such a waiver is in the national interest of the United States” and “submits to Congress a report describing the reasons for the determination.”

    Section six only details the responsibilities of the Secretary of State to designate a “high-level employee of the Department of State” to coordinate the combating of cybercrime on a state and international level.

    Section seven details that the President appoint an “employee of the United States Government with primary responsibility with respect to matters relating to cybercrime policy.” This employee must also “consult with industry groups in the United States, civil society organizations, and other organizations with an interest in combating cybercrime.”

    Finally at the end, section eight demands that the President take into account “the efforts of the government of that country to combat cybercrime” before finalizing or modifying any trade agreements.

    This bill seems like the U.S. wants to be the head coordinator of a global cybercrimes unit. The fact that the bill gives the President the power to freeze funds and trade to countries that do not comply is somewhat worrying. The bill was referred to committee and could be up for a vote whenever they feel like it. We’ll keep you up to date on any changes.

    The entire bill can be found on Open Congress. Read it for more information and become informed.

    Do you think that the U.S. is trying to become an international cybercrime police force? Or is this just a step in the right direction in stopping cybercrime? Let us know in the comments.

  • The Netherlands: The Most Active Country On Twitter

    With expectations that Twitter will cross the threshold of 500 million accounts as soon as later this month, and with their recent modification to how they will treat requests for censorship concerning tweets, what better time than now to take a look at Twitter activity around the world. A new study from people who know more about Twitter growth and trends than you, Semiocast, show that the hierarchy of countries, at least in terms of accounts and activity, is shifting around a bit.

    In the land where parody accounts of celebrities brush shoulders with the insipid accounts of real celebrities literally getting paid to tweet, which is layered on top of millions of actually meaningful accounts, it probably isn’t a surprise to anyone that the United States is home to the most Twitter accounts with nearly 108 million accounts. While fathoming that amount is kind of a headache – seriously, that’s an average of roughly 1 account per 3 people in the United States – it only accounts for 28.1% of all Twitter accounts worldwide. Still, the growth of Twittering Americans doesn’t seem like it’ll slow down anytime since 5.6 million accounts were created in the United States in December 2011 alone.

    Brazil and Japan are involved in an interesting contest for 2nd and 3rd place in the Twitterscape. Brazil has actually surpassed Japan in terms of the sheer quantity of user accounts but Japan still exhibits more Twitter activity than Brazil. Between September 2011 and December 2011, the study says, 30% of accounts in Japan posted a message whereas only 25% of accounts in Brazil posted a message. It’s all a matter of which metric you want to weight, but then again, it’s not like there’s a trophy for being #2 Twitter Country (not that there is for 1st place, either). Additionally, Japanese is still the 2nd most used language on Twitter after English.

    While the United States might be the girthiest nation when it comes to Twitter accounts, they’re certainly not the most active (you like how that’s a metaphor for a lot of things related to the American lifestyle?). In fact, the distinction of most active Twittering country belongs to the Netherlands. One-third of all accounts located in the Netherlands posted at least one public message between September 1, 2011, and November 30, 2011. Japan and Spain follow in 2nd and 3rd place, respectively, while the U.S. places at 4th in activity. Still, even with the U.S. ranking as the 4th most active country on Twitter, that ranking would surely be lower if not for the sheer heft of accounts existing in the United States.

    With so much drama in the Twitter lately, it’s a bit hard to anticipate how these figures will look this time in 2013. By then we’ll have a fuller understanding of how Twitter’s new policy of selectively withholding tweets (if and when they do) has affected users’ activity. Additionally, now that Twitter is expanding languages to be included in their Translation Center, such as Arabic and Farsi, it’ll be curious to see how those changes may affect the landscape of Twitter activity.

    Anybody out there got any speculations you wanna bet on? See any changes on the horizon for how different parts of the world might use Twitter? Feel free to share below in the comments.

  • Tweet #AskState To Ask Questions Directly to U.S. State Department

    As we bore into the year that is 2012, the U.S. Department of State has chosen to step up their Internet vocab by inviting Twitter users to submit questions to them throughout the month of January as part of their 21st Century Statecraft Month. By using the hashtag #AskState, Tweeters can pose their questions to one of the ten official Twitter accounts maintained by the State Department.

    Each account is tailored to accomodate a language: @StateDept (English), @USAbilAraby (Arabic), @USA_Zhongwen (Chinese), @USAdarFarsi (Farsi), @USAenFrancais (French), @USAHindiMein (Hindi), @USAemPortugues (Portuguese), @USApoRusski (Russian), @USAenEspanol (Spanish) and @USAUrdu (Urdu).

    Users can tweet questions anytime during the month, but answers will only be provided to selected questions on each Friday afternoon of January during the Department’s Daily Press Briefing. A video clip of each question that is accepted and addressed by the Department’s Spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, will then be posted on the State Department’s YouTube Channel.

    So what could anybody possibly have to ask the Department of State about? Hmmm? Especially considering they are the government and this is the Internet and we are users of Internets, is there anything we’d like to hear them address? Anything at all?

    @Alcix
    Josh    #AskState: @StateDept When will you come to reason and #StopSOPA? It’s an internet killing act that will give control to media corporations 1 hour ago via web · powered by @socialditto

    @ogrmi
    ogrmi    Put this on your RADAR: #AskState: U.S. State Dept to take questions from Twitter Friday afternoons during January #NoSOPA @OccupyChicago 58 minutes ago via Timely by Demandforce · powered by @socialditto

    @fightfortheftr
    Fight for the Future    Want to ask the @statedept what they think of #SOPA and #PIPA? You can every Fri in January, just send a question with the #AskState tag 1 hour ago via web · powered by @socialditto

    @cdoten
    Chris Doten    +1 RT @digiphile: @StateDept How does pressure for stronger IP laws relate to #netfreedom policies? http://t.co/LoCd6eVT #SOPA #AskState 4 hours ago via TweetDeck · powered by @socialditto

    @bernielomax
    bernielomax    @StateDept SOPA++ is ok to Americans as long as it only censors foreign sites. How is this promotion of censorship leadership? #AskState 1 day ago via web · powered by @socialditto

    @digiphile
    Alex Howard    @StateDept What is #SecClinton‘s position on #SOPA & #PIPA? How would they affect world #netfreedom? http://t.co/yPuGtIG4 #AskState #gov20 1 day ago via TweetDeck · powered by @socialditto

    @djninjastar
    djninjastar    @statedept #AskState #SOPA will harm our ability to be competitive in the international markets. Is the US receiving pressure to pass it? 1 day ago via web · powered by @socialditto

    Then there was this.

    @LucyKafanov
    Lucy Kafanov    @joshrogin @fedscoop oh goody. Only thing that’ll make this more useful is if the State Dept limits responses to 140 characters. #AskState 22 minutes ago via web · powered by @socialditto

    Seriously, though, I don’t think people quite understand that you can ask the questions with #AskState any time during the month of January. Most of the tweets you see out there right now are people simply repeating the news that you can direct questions to the Department of State using the hashtag. HEY. YOU CAN ASK YOUR QUESTIONS NOW OR ANYTIME – YOU DON’T HAVE TO ONLY DO IT ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON. THE STATE DEPARTMENT SAYS THEY WILL ONLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS DURING THE BRIEFING ON FRIDAY. YOU, HOWEVER, CAN POST QUESTIONS ANYTIME. MMKAY? THX!

  • Canadian Man Enters U.S. With Scanned Passport on iPad

    This certainly isn’t going to sit well with the border hawks who want to fence off the borders of the United States: a man successfully crossed the Canadian/U.S. border without presenting his passport. It starts out sounding like a bad joke but it’s completely real.

    After arriving at the border, Martin Reisch realized that he had forgotten his passport at home. Living somewhere in Canada that isn’t exactly close to the border, he didn’t feel like driving all the way back to retrieve the passport and instead gave the problem the old Jack Burton “What the hell” solution and decided to try to cross the border anyways. Instead of offering up a passport, though, Reisch produced the scanned image of his passport he had on his iPad to the border patrol guard. You gotta give the guy credit for trying to pull a fast one on the U.S. border patrol especially since much has been argued in the post-9/11 era about the security of the U.S. borders.

    Ah well. Better luck next time, Martin Reisch. Ballsy doesn’t get you across the border.

    Er, oh. Wait?

    “I figured I’d try, and in the worst case, I would have to go home,” he said Tuesday.

    Reisch, 33, said he explained his situation to the customs agent, who seemed mildly annoyed when he handed him the iPad.

    “He kind of gave me a stare, like neither impressed nor amused,” Reisch said of their exchange last Friday in southern Quebec.

    The officer took the iPad into the border office for five minutes before coming back out to give Reisch the green light and wish him happy holidays.

    “He was very nice about it,” he said of the officer.

    “I think a good part of it had to do with the fact that it was the holidays and I seem like a nice-enough person.”

    That’s what he told CTV, Canada’s largest news channel.

    Are you kidding me? Wham bam thankyouma’am and Martin Reisch is enjoying the good old U.S. of A. thanks to his trusty iPad! What the hell does that even mean? We U.S. citizens have to pay $140 for fancy, techno-coding passports with computery parts in them so that people won’t make counterfeits of them and yet a scan on an iPad blows all that precaution away. And honestly, who keeps a scan of their passport on their iPad in the first place?

    CTV didn’t receive any response from the U.S. Customers and Border Protection when they asked about the incident but they did cite the department’s policy for accepting other forms of identification other than a passport such as a Nexus pass or an enhanced driver’s license. Still, no mention of a scan of a passport on there. Would it still have worked, I wonder, if Reisch would’ve simply had a dot matrix print-out of his passport that he rendered on his iPad? Maybe I’ll just draw a chalky facsimile of my passport on a brick the next time I accidentally leave the real one at home. Should work, right?

    As if that one slip-up wasn’t enough, Reisch decided to double-dip the U.S. border patrol and used the iPad scan of his passport again when he returned to Canada later that same day. You are the winner, Martin Reisch. Indeed.

    Something tells me that Apple’s market shares in Mexico and Central America are about to explode.

    So what do you think, did the Customs Department screw the pooch on this one or should a scan of a passport on an iPad be an acceptable substitute for a required country border-crossing identification?