“While technology, politics, and geekery (sci-fi movies and video games) tend to dominate the long term memes, people are discussing all sorts of things on Twitter — from sports to pop culture to cooking.”—What People Say When They Tweet - ReadWriteWeb
“As aides looked over the campaign calendar, chief strategist Mark Penn confidently predicted that an early win in California would put her over the top because she would pick up all the state’s 370 delegates. It sounded smart, but as every high school civics student now knows, Penn was wrong: Democrats, unlike the Republicans, apportion their delegates according to vote totals, rather than allowing any state to award them winner-take-all.”—The Five Mistakes Clinton Made - TIME
This is going to be an interesting battle. The 700 MHz spectrum in the C block that Verizon won in the recent FCC auction requires open access — i.e., any application on any device can use the spectrum. Verizon’s position is that there will be two paths to the network, one entirely open (and thus compliant with these rules), and one with more limited devices that are supported by Verizon. Google believes the rules require all devices, whether distributed by Verizon or someone else, to support all apps.
The right answer, I suspect, is somewhere in the middle. Verizon will undoubtedly distribute lots of devices (one possible example: wireless devices that report electric meter usage) that simply cannot and should not support open applications. So the rules need to accept that some devices will not be open.
At the same time, the rules were explicitly designed so that the winner, at a bare minimum, would not be able to turn off or disable features (e.g., GPS, Bluetooth) that devices already include. That’s clear.
But how much obligation does Verizon have to distribute and support truly “open devices” — a much bigger task than simply not crippling the devices it does sell? I think the rules are ambiguous on that. It should be an interesting fight.
Google understands that there is a powerful network effect in search advertising. That is, the more search ads it handles, the more money it will make and the harder it will be for anyone else to build a competing system. The more searches it handles, the more advertisers it attracts. And the more bidders in its auction, the higher the prices it will enjoy.
By attracting a commanding share of the search advertising activity, Google also has the best data with which to create equations that maximize the money it makes from each search. It turns out that picking which ad to display when is a subtle art that can have a great effect. Yahoo estimated that until recently, Google earned twice as much on each search than it did.
So while Google is giving Yahoo a fair bit of aid in the short run, I suspect that it is betting that in the long run this deal is going to sap Yahoo’s ability to build an effective search advertising system. That’s because Yahoo will have even less volume of searches to attract customers, raise bids and give it data with which to improve its ad selection technology.
“Monthly access packages for AT&T Mobile TV begin at $15 a month for the Basic package, which includes unlimited access to Mobile TV, as well as access to the exclusive CNCRT channel for a limited time.”—