Man Claims He Used iPad to Cross Into US

Man Claims He Used iPad to Cross Into US - A Canadian man traveling by car to Vermont claimed his iPad helped save the day after he realized he left his passport, which is required to cross into the United States, at his home in Quebec.

Martin Reisch, 33, said he arrived at Canada's Stanstead crossing and proceeded to the U.S. border post at Derby Line, Vt. He showed the U.S. officer his Canadian driver's license, Medicaid card and a digital scan of his passport he had on his iPad on Dec. 30.

"He didn't say much," Reisch told ABCNews.com. "He took it with a serious face and went into the border patrol house. Five minutes later he came out and said 'Merry Christmas. You can go through.'"

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection today called Reisch's story "false."

"In this case, the individual had both a driver's license and birth certificate, which the CBP officer used to determine identity and citizenship in order to admit the traveler into the country," the agency said in a statement.

Man Claims He Used iPad to Cross Into US (ABC News)

But Reisch isn't backing down from his story.

"I can't lie. I don't even know where my birth certificate is," he said. "Maybe they are making an official statement to help lessen the impact."

The story went viral after Reisch's friends retweeted his experience.

"I don't want to start anything," he said of all the attention he has received. "But this sounds like it's taking a turn for the worse."

He added that his experience does make him think about how technology can be used for identification purposes when traveling at some point in the future.

"I think mobile devices could develop applications with security protocols so it's possible to bring your ID without having it stolen," he said. "Obviously not just a jpeg scan of your passport." ( ABC News )

READ MORE - Man Claims He Used iPad to Cross Into US

How to dispose of old electronics in a responsible way

Pulling the Plug. How to dispose of old electronics in a responsible way. I just got a new laptop for Christmas and don't know what to do with my old one. I've heard that most electronic waste ends up being exported to Asia, where poor laborers recycle the scrap under unhealthy, unsafe conditions. How do I get rid of my old computer in an environmentally and socially responsible way?

Where do old electronics end up?

Electronic waste, or e-waste, is a growing concern for a number of reasons. First of all, it's literally growing—recent reports indicate that the planet will soon generate 50 million metric tons of discarded computers, phones, and televisions annually. That's a small fraction of all the trash we produce, but those mountains of dead gadgets pose a special problem, thanks to the range of hazardous components they contain—stuff like lead, mercury, and cadmium. In light of this, several states have recently passed landfill bans on e-waste.

But the social justice issue you bring up—the fact that a lot of e-waste ends up in informal salvage yards in Africa and Asia—has captured much of our attention lately. The Lantern, for example, vividly remembers this 60 Minutes segment from 2008, in which correspondent Scott Pelley followed a shipment of old TVs and computer parts collected during a community recycling event in Denver to Guiyu, China, a "wasteland" where workers use dangerous, primitive methods—like open-air burning and acid baths—to exhume precious metals from the scrap. Toxic residue from these operations can cause serious health and pollution problems—one 2007 study showed that children in Guiyu had significantly higher levels of lead in their blood than did children in a neighboring village with no e-waste processors.

The Basel Action Network, the watchdog organization that accompanied Pelley to China, estimates that 80 percent of the electronic waste collected for recycling in America actually gets shipped to developing countries, with most winding up in informal salvage yards like the one in Guiyu. That's why BAN and other activists would like to halt all exports of hazardous e-waste to poor countries. Recycling trade groups disagree with BAN's assessment and argue that putting a stop to exports would penalize those countries with adequate facilities.

It's a complicated problem, but one that's worth our attention—even if, as individuals, our solutions may be imperfect. So before you lose yourself in your new laptop—or music player, or mobile phone—spare a few minutes thinking about how to send your old gadget to a peaceful, responsible rest.

Your first step is to figure out whether your old device is still usable. If so, find it a new home. Older relatives, who may not need quite as much processing firepower, are good candidates. (Papa Lantern enjoys Bollywood soundtracks and NPR podcasts on his hand-me-up iPod.) If you decide to sell or donate your device to a stranger, make sure to scrub your personal information (PDF). And don't give anything away unless it really does work; otherwise, you're just pushing the disposal problem onto someone else.

Craigslist and eBay are always options for selling a machine in good condition. It may not be easy to give away an old computer, though. Harried nonprofit employees often lack the time or technical expertise to wipe data or configure old software systems, but many organizations around the United States will take computers and fix them up. Here's one comprehensive list of donation options from the Community Microsoft Authorized Refurbisher program, which provides low-cost Windows licenses to companies that install them on spruced-up, secondhand computers and then redistribute those machines.

When evaluating your choices, look for evidence that donated computers are being put back into circulation: Ask for the names of recipient schools and charities. A reputable refurbisher should also be able to provide a description of how they repair and test their machines, and offer free or low-cost hard drive wiping. If you do decide to donate your computer, do it fast—even if a machine can be repaired, it won't do anyone much good if it's too old to run current software.

Machines that are more than five years old should be recycled. Look for recyclers that have registered with the Basel Action Network's e-Stewards program. These companies have pledged—among other things (PDF)—not to export hazardous electronic waste to developing countries. (In the next few months, the e-Stewards will be converted into a fully fledged certification program with independent, on-site auditing.) The EPA, along with other stakeholders, has also developed a set of guidelines for electronics recycling. Facilities certified to those standards—known as R2, for "Responsible Recycling"—are just starting to be announced. There's been heated debate over the relative merits of the two programs, but the Lantern's take is that both represent a major step forward in terms of transparency and responsibility.

If you can't get access to an e-Steward, the California-based Electronics TakeBack Coalition recommends manufacturer-sponsored programs as the next best option. In many states, in fact, manufacturers are required by law to cover the cost of collecting and recycling. The caveat here is that even companies that have made strong environmental commitments may not be particularly transparent about where the material they receive ends up—depending on which downstream processors they use, there's always a danger that junked machines will land in a foreign salvage yard. But producer responsibility is a key part of the e-waste puzzle, so the Lantern believes it's worth the risk, especially if the alternative is dumping your electronics in the trash.

Finally, if your manufacturer doesn't take back its products, the coalition suggests the comprehensive collection programs at Best Buy or Staples. For cell phones, try the mail-in programs run by Capstone Wireless and Call2Recycle, both of which have signed the e-Steward pledge.

Local recycling events organized by community groups or charities can be a good way to get rid of unwanted electronics, but environmental groups warn that the companies running these collections often sell what they stockpile to brokers, who then export it. Free events are the most dubious. If you're not asked to pay a small recycling fee—particularly for old, bulky cathode-ray televisions, whose components aren't valuable enough to offset the cost of recycling them responsibly—check to make sure that someone, like a government group or manufacturer, is footing the bill.

If all this gives you a headache, consider making the following resolution: In 2010, I will curb my e-lust. After all, the fewer electronics you accumulate, the fewer you eventually have to get rid of. The Lantern—a true child of the Silicon Valley—understands that this is a tough pledge. But isn't that the point of a New Year's resolution? ( slate.com )

READ MORE - How to dispose of old electronics in a responsible way

Google's digitization of books

Google's digitization of books. The Google Books settlement with U.S. writers and publishers, now scheduled for release Nov. 13, is the result of a four-year tussle over the question of whether the company has the right to digitize millions of books, both those in print and those out of print.

Google began its digitizing project in 2005, going to several major university libraries and digitizing every book it found there. The company said its aim is to increase the amount of knowledge available online. But the Authors Guild of America accused the company of "massive copyright infringement" and began a class-action lawsuit against it. Publishers later joined in. That class action has resulted in Google displaying only snippets of books not yet in the public domain.

Google's book digitizing project impacts readers, writers and the book publishing industry. (Carsten Koall/Getty Images)

A $125-million US settlement was announced in 2008 but was dragged back to court in June of this year amid accusations that it was unfair, following an antitrust investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice. Although the deal is being worked out in a U.S. court, it will apply to everyone connected to the publishing business around the world.

Under the terms of the settlement, Google will have the right to digitize any book published up to Jan. 5, 2009, and available for sale in the U.S. This includes almost all Canadian books in print, as virtually all books published in Canada are available in the U.S.

For readers, it could mean access to millions of books, including some long out of print, on the internet. The most likely subscribers to the Google service would be public, school or university libraries. Individual readers would also have the option to buy books — at prices ranging from $1.99 to $29.99 US.

The intention is to have a searchable database with millions of titles. Consumers will be able to download and print books in a PDF format. They will also be able to read them online or on devices such as iPhones and digital readers. Google Editions, an online service that will let readers buy electronic versions of books, was launched this October.

Concerns for readers

The main issue for readers is privacy. Because you are searching and reading on a public network, there is little assurance that your browsing and reading habits are private. Here are some of the questions raised by groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

• Are your reading habits safe from fishing expeditions by the government or lawyers in civil cases?
• How will Google itself use information about your reading history?
• How will Google combine information about your reading habits with other information it may have about you through its other products?

Issues for authors

The service presents enormous opportunities, by putting a diverse array of books into the hands of a huge volume of readers. Some authors are welcoming the prospect that people around the world will have access to their work. But both writers and publishers have concerns about compensation and how their works might be used.

Google has agreed to pay $60 US per title for in-print books it has already digitized. There is potential for additional compensation from books sold through the online service and ads posted alongside any Google book. The company has pledged a total pot of $45 million, but authors have to apply to get their money. If they ignore the issue, or are unaware of the Google Books settlement, they get nothing.

The sheer size and scope of the Google deal is a concern for many players, from authors and publishers to governments and potential competitors. Google's deal states that the company has a right to digitize any book, unless it is explicitly withheld. So any author who does not want his or her book included in the deal had to opt out by May of this year.

Similarly, authors and publishers who want to be compensated for the digitizing of their book have to register with the Book Rights Registry, a U.S.-based not-for-profit organization created expressly for the purpose of administering copyright fees for Google Books. If authors don't register, no one will be making efforts to track them down.

For "orphan" works — those for which the copyright holder is unknown or cannot be found — Google stands to claim all the proceeds of offering them to the public. It has an effective legal monopoly on these works, which is of concern to the company's potential competitors.

Public domain

In the U.S., books become public domain 70 years after the death of the author. But international rules for when works come into public domain vary by country, with different regimes for Britain, Australia, the European Union and Canada, whose copyright act is currently under review.

The U.S. Copyright Office, the European Union, Germany, France, five U.S. attorneys general, Microsoft, Yahoo and Amazon are among those who have opposed the deal. Google agreed to appoint EU members to its Book Rights Registry, which would usurp the role played by national copyright organizations. Even Chinese writers groups have come forward to object.

Many of the international aspects of the deal are still to be worked out. Google has said it plans to use geo-blocking technology to prevent access to books in other countries until agreements are reached there.

Timeline

2004: Google announces it has agreements with major U.S. university libraries to digitize their books.

September 2005: Authors Guild in the United States launches a class-action suit.

October 2005: Five large U. S. publishers sue Google over copyright infringement.

October 2008: The Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers settle with Google.

June 11, 2009: A U.S. court begins reviewing the settlement agreement to see if it is fair.

Sept. 4, 2009: Authors whose books have been digitized by May 2009 had until this date to opt out of the settlement.

Nov. 13, 2009: Court to finalize settlement agreement.

June 5, 2010: Deadline for authors to apply for payment through the Books Rights Registry.

( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Google's digitization of books

Small business needs 'free' thinking, Wired editor says

Small business needs 'free' thinking, Wired editor says. Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson has made waves with his book Free: The Future of a Radical Price, by suggesting that companies need to start thinking about how to attract customers by giving away some of their products and services for nothing.

It's a message he delivered in a speech to Canadian entrepreneurs in Toronto on Wednesday, as part of Small Business Week. Anderson discussed his keynote, the book and some of the misconceptions of his idea of "free"

Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson thinks Google and Microsoft are mirror images of each other. (Ben Margot/Associated Press)

Can you summarize the focus of your speech?

One of the messages of Free is that [free] is an incredible accelerator of small business formation. We think of "free" a lot in terms of producers offering free products, but also as consumers, we take advantage of free products. For businesses starting up today, the availability of free software like open source or hosted solutions — the fact that you don't need hardware because there's so much available in the cloud — this has basically lowered the cost of starting a business to the point where you can do it on a credit card.

The internet has a set of tools for where we work, and the fact that it is increasingly free has made it the golden age of the small company. It's a great time to start companies right now. It's never been cheaper. If you can do the company increasingly online, you can take advantage of "free" as a way to start your company, but also as a way to sell and market your products.

There are a lot of misconceptions about your book. You've mentioned situations where companies such as Gillette essentially give razors away but make their money on selling blades. That's not really what you mean by "free," right?

That is the traditional form of free, which is that it's not really free. You end up paying for it later. That continues to be a totally viable business model, and some of the book is about that. That's not really why I wrote the book or what it focuses on. Instead, the book focuses on the unique characteristics of digital markets. The reason that free is a bit of a trick in the traditional sense is that products can't really be free. The razor has a real cost and it gets paid back really quickly. The thing about digital goods is that there are no real costs. When you open a document in Google Docs or when you use Google Maps or Gmail, the cost of serving you as a customer is so close to zero that they can effectively round down. As a result, you can have a viable, profitable business model by having one per cent of your customers paying and the rest getting it for free. That allows the first real kind of free, where someone's paying and money is being made, but it's certainly not you.

One of Google's top executives was in town a few weeks ago and said that Canadian businesses have done a poor job of using the web to expand to a global level. It sounds like what you're saying is that in order to take advantage of the idea of "free," you essentially have to be addressing a global market. The bigger the market, the better, right?

Exactly. Converting a small percentage of a large number.

So in the context of Canadian small businesses, do you agree with Google's assessment, that Canadian companies aren't doing as well at that?

We have to make a distinction between physical goods and digital goods. With physical goods, not much has changed. It's a little easier to sell them online — you have distribution channels like Amazon and eBay — but you're still somewhat constrained by the economics of the real world. For digital goods, there is no reason for every digital company not to be a global digital company, unless you're selling tax services for one particular Canadian province [for example]. In general, if you're a software company offering software as a service, of course it's global. Not only should you be offering it globally, which is innate in the internet, you should also be thinking about global demand and marketing and using a free version to propagate a sample of your product to the widest possible audience. Every web company is a global company, whether they know it or not. The question is, are they thinking like a global company?

But aren't things like geoblocking and licensing a constraint to getting your digital goods to a global audience? Something like Hulu, the website that streams television shows for free, is largely constrained to the United States because of these issues.

There are legacy issues, but that has nothing to do with the infrastructure or Hulu's own business, it's that they get the content from companies who are locked into geographic restrictions. It's the same for Amazon with books and music and games. You have to unwind these geographic contracts and exclusivities and sometimes this takes decades. But there's nothing intrinsic about this; it's a hangover from 20th-century distribution models and it's just a matter of time before it goes away.

How much of an effect has Google had on this idea of free? They offer a large number of products, many of which are free. Was the rise of Google a watershed in this whole idea?

I think so. Google is the poster child for free. They have more than 300 products and almost all of them are free to consumers. Some are advertising-supported, some are not. Some are just plain, old free. Each one of them has its own sort of industrial logic, but what they all do is take advantage of digital economics — it costs very little for Google to offer these products to you. Every one that you use sort of reinforces your attachment to Google, the brand, the network. Some day they'll make money from you. If you click on one ad a week, you're profitable for Google, even if you're using every one of their services. It just takes so little to pay back the cost of doing this. So yes, they are the canonical company based on a free business model.

What they've done is taken the media model of advertising-supported and extended it across the board to products and services of all sorts, from word processing and spreadsheets to email to applications software to hosting. They showed just how far the media business model could extend and how much a powerful advertising engine could subsidize in the form of other products and services.

That's great and inspiring, but it has also created what many people worry is an emerging monopoly. I'll just point out the irony — Microsoft took its monopoly on operating systems and applications software to subsidize its entry into the online world and search. Google is taking its monopoly on search and using it to subsidize its entry into operating systems and word processing and spreadsheets. They're absolute mirror images of each other, and it's just fascinating to watch it play out.

So if Google is the poster child of free, is Microsoft the counter-poster child of not-free?

Microsoft has been competing with free for 30 years. They had to get people to pay for software in the first place. Software used to be something that you got free with a computer, with the mainframe. Then they had to compete with piracy. Then they had to compete with software that came bundled with the computer, so they released Microsoft Works that came with it. Then they had to compete with open source, then software as a service, now they have to compete online with Google. Microsoft has had more history with competing with free than any company in the world. They've done so very effectively so far, but it's only getting harder. In the next year, you'll see Word and Office become free online services. Right now they offer a service to small businesses called BizSmart by which all their enterprise software is free to companies that are less than three years old and have less then $1 million in revenue. They're definitely using free, but they're not as successful at it as Google. But nobody is.

I'm sure you get asked this a lot, but what's the solution for news organizations and newspapers? How do the media make "free" work?

I do get asked this a lot. This is one of the most misunderstood things around. The book doesn't argue that everything should be free or that newspapers should be 100 per cent free. The book argues instead for something called "freemium," which is a combination of free and paid. The book goes out of its way to identify the Wall Street Journal and WSJ.com as the best model. That is, it's a hybrid. The most popular content is free and advertising-supported, but as you dig deeper, the niche content — or maybe if you just read more stories in the case of the Financial Times and FT.com, where after 10 stories a month you have to pay — as the importance to you of this publication becomes more clear, they switch you from a free to a paid user. That is 90 per cent free, 10 per cent paid.

The problem is what's free and what's paid is an equation that every publication has to answer for itself. You can't just say, "We'll do what the Wall Street Journal is doing," because you may not be the No. 1 business publication in the United States or have a commodities trading desk that people will pay for. That model works well for the Wall Street Journal, but would it work for the Globe [and Mail]? I don't know, and that's why we're all stumbling our way toward figuring out which freemium model works for us. ( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Small business needs 'free' thinking, Wired editor says

Small businesses flock to Twitter, Facebook

Small businesses flock to Twitter, Facebook. Small businesses are using social media, services like Facebook and Twitter, like never before to communicate with customers, advertise on the cheap and create buzz around their business.

"I think Facebook and Twitter, whether we like it or not, have become the new word-of-mouth," said Donna Dooher, executive chef and owner of Mildred's Temple Kitchen in Toronto.

Mike Charbonneau of the Revue Cinema said he uses Twitter as a 'digital marquee.' (CBC) But while the technology may be new, some small business owners see the idea behind social media as old.

"We speak to each other differently. So for us it makes sense to explore the possibility to use those networking opportunities to create some buzz around our business."

For Willie Cromack of John Henry Bikes in Vancouver, using social media is about informing his customers — many of his company's tweets and Facebook posts include tips on riding — and maintaining an online reputaton.

"We do a lot of talking on our social networks to get people to understand that we're good people, and we're not going to mess them around," said Cromack.

Lewis Hilsenteger of iUpgrade, a store selling pre-owned Apple products that opened in June 2008, said using Facebook and Twitter is about survival.

"I don't think we would be around within this year without social media," said Hilsenteger.

Because he's selling a specialized high-tech product, Hilsenteger said his customers need to know what's in his store at a given moment. Many of them receive his tweets directly to their iPhones, he said.

"Most of [our customers], either through Twitter or through our website, find it important to know what our inventory is and how quickly it turns around, particularly because the inventory is changing so often. They don't know that there will always be another one," said Hilsenteger.

Use Twitter, Facebook for different tasks

Twitter and Facebook offer services that are in some ways similar — a stream of updates delivered over the internet — but businesses tend to use them for different purposes.

'We do a lot of talking on our social networks to get people to understand that we're good people, and we're not going to mess them around.'—Willie Cromack, John Henry Bikes

Twitter updates are just text, and no more than 140 characters, but they can include links to web pages. Twitter users can follow these updates so they can see them as soon they're posted.

Dooher said Twitter is great for daily updates delivered quickly.

"We do use Twitter every day before lunch service, and we tweet out our quickie [lunch special] of the day.

"That's just helping them make a decision. If they choose to come down, that's great. They know exactly what they're going to get. If it's something that doesn't appeal to them, they move on," she said.

Mike Charbonneau, marketing director for the Revue Cinema in Toronto, said he uses Twitter as a "digital marquee" for his community movie theatre.

"That's really what we use Twitter for, to let people know on a daily basis what's playing," said Charbonneau. "If they don't check us out at the website, if they don't check us out in the magazine we publish, if they don't check us out on Facebook, well, hopefully they will on Twitter."

The updates, or tweets, are public and searchable, so it's possible for anyone searching Twitter to find posts there. Charbonneau said that feature has helped expand the Revue's audience beyond its Roncesvalles neighbourhood.

Mildred's Temple Kitchen earned a mention in the blog of Peter Merholz — who coined the word "blog" — after someone recommended the restaurant to him over Twitter. A member of the kitchen's staff saw the recommendation and thanked Merholz's friend for the referral.

Facebook, on the other hand, offers more options for its posts. There's no limit on the size of the updates, and they can include photos and video. Links to other websites can include more information on the content there, including a thumbnail view. As well, discussions are more intuitively organized on Facebook, so they're easier to follow.

'A good place to go'

However, Facebook updates will more than likely only be seen by users who become fans of the Facebook page of a business or join its Facebook group.

A fan of the Revue Cinema started a "Friends of the Revue" Facebook group, which Charbonneau subsequently took over.

"People can go there and have a discussion, post pictures, so for people who are big fans of the Revue, that's a good place to go," Charbonneau said.

Willie Cromack of John Henry Bikes said he uses the company's Facebook fan page for prizes and communicating with his customers, but his posts can get lost among updates from friends.

"More conversation can take place [on Facebook], but it takes a more entertaining comment to get the responses," said Cromack.

"You can't just say, 'We got some boxes in today.' You have to have a video, a picture, a link that says, I'm going to be more entertaining today than the next guy," he said.

Cromack uses other social media sites, like Flickr and YouTube, to host his business's pictures and videos, and links to them from Twitter, Facebook and the company's blog.

Businesses can also invite their Facebook fans to special events, and Facebook will remind them when the date is approaching.

"The really good thing about Facebook is the events component. We frequently have special programming at the Revue," said Charbonneau. "Facebook's great for that."

Facebook and Twitter also differ in the number of people who use them. Facebook has over 300 million users worldwide, while Twitter, a newer service, expects to have 25 million users by the end of 2009. However, the businesses we talked to all had more Twitter followers than Facebook fans.

"We try to use Facebook for some special offers. Sometimes we'll have a discount provided strictly for members of the Facebook group that only they would know about," said Hilsenteger.

Free advertising

Because Twitter and Facebook are free services, they're especially attractive to small businesses in a tight economy.

"As a non-profit organization, you can imagine, the more ways we can get our message out about what's playing, the easier it is for us to fill the seats with people," said Charbonneau.

"Social media has allowed companies like ours to reach a significant amount of people with little or no cost at all," said Hilsenteger.

Cromack said Twitter, Facebook and his company's blog allow him to compete with bigger companies on a more level playing field.

"This is a great opportunity for us to be best-in-class, first-in, to have the same size of screen that Coke and IBM work with, and I could be as good or better than them without spending a ridiculous amount of money," said Cromack.

Dooher said social media offer an attractive alternative to traditional advertising media.

"We were being pushed to look at online advertising, print advertising, radio advertising, which really is a big investment of money, and it's very hard to get a return on that investment," she said.

"But word-of-mouth is always been the best way to promote a hospitality facility. And it's free," said Dooher.

However, tweeting every day and updating Facebook pages does take time, and the small business owners we talked to cautioned against getting lost in social media.

"We have a website, we have a newsletter, we have Facebook, we have Twitter, and sometimes I think, 'Oh, and we cook! Oh yes, I forgot about that!'" said Doohan.

"I find it's important to remember what you do, and not to get too caught up in [social media]. And we were getting a caught up in it. We were losing our minds, and we thought, 'What are we doing? Why are we doing this?'" she said.

Doohan said he found delegating some of the social media responsibilities to other members of her staff helpful.

"I will confess to you, I am 55 years of age, so it's not technology that I'm very comfortable with or familiar with, and I have engaged the services and the consultation of many of the young people that work with me," she said.

Cromack also recruited his employees to help with writing the daily biking tips for Twitter, recording videos for posting on YouTube and writing reviews of new products.

"Once I worked out the system that I wanted, and the plan I wanted in place, then I could delegate sections of it to staff," said Cromack.

"It is time-consuming, but in the end, so is talking to a customer, so it depends on where you think your time is valuable," he said. ( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Small businesses flock to Twitter, Facebook

Can Governments Get Smarter?

Can Governments Get Smarter?. Around the world corporations and individuals have embraced technology to make their lives easier and their businesses more competitive. But what about governments?

The challenges facing the government sector are immense, expensive and complicated. Yet there is room for innovation and effective solutions. Consider this: renewing a driver's license in person cost about $8. The cost to renew it online? One dollar.

In everything from health care wait times to public safety issues, to repairing potholes, governments around the world are implementing solutions that make their citizen's lives easier. Here's a few example of innovations from around the world.

Networks and Social Networks

Sometimes it's as simple as using social networking applications like Twitter to report problems with government services. For instance the city of San Franscisco is using Twitter for service complaints (street cleaning, graffiti, potholes etc.) and trying to resolve the complaints within 3 days. Governments could expand to government collaborating with citizens using online brainstorming sessions and real time voting.

In Ontario, data that can be used multiple times on a citizen's behalf--such as in registering a newborn or applying for social system benefits--need be entered only once, eliminating the need for users to input data multiple times when interacting with government online.

Smarter government also means putting the citizen at the centre of government services. For instance, in Australia, the Centrelink service is groups disparate government departments around citizen's life events, like marriage, births or the need for elder care, instead of forcing citizens to visit multiple different departments.

Thinking About Analytics

Government agencies have used statistical analysis for a long time, for instance to measure tax compliance, what's new is that now governments are turning to analytics as a basis for decision making.

Government analytics involves statistical analysis to help detect patterns and trends in raw data and use it to make better decisions.

The U.S. Postal Service is using to analytics to make mail delivery faster. They've improved on-time delivery rates from around 80 per cent during the 1980s to 94 percent for first class mail today.

To do this, the service puts test pieces of mail into the system every day and tracks how long it takes the test letters, postcards and boxes to be delivered. This system is used to identify bottlenecks and correct problems.

Open up the Data Vault

Allowing citizens access to the government's vast data sets enables a better understanding--and, ultimately, a better stewardship--of government and its resources.

Increasing access to government data, by putting more data online in accessible format that citizens can use leads to new applications and innovations.

For example the Toronto Open Data initiative launched in early November to make that city's government data sets more "open, accessible and transparent." The data includes catalogues of events such as festivals, lists of licensed child care centres, priority investment neighbourhoods, and in the future data on crimes, homelessness, city budgets and expenses and expected to be released. Making this data accessible empowers citizens to innovate with it.

As one citizen said, one of the roles of government is to unleash the potential of its citizens.( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Can Governments Get Smarter?

Can my PC run on Windows 7?

Can my PC run on Windows 7?. Is it for you?. Microsoft launched MS-DOS, its first operating system for mainstream desktop computers, in 1981. Twenty-eight years and six operating systems later, the company is rolling out Windows 7.

If you buy a new desktop PC or notebook in the coming months, it will probably come with Windows 7 installed, but is this operating system for you? Will it work with your existing software? Can you install it on your old computer?

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer speaks to IT professionals about Windows 7 on Oct. 21 at the company's New Efficiency event in Toronto. (Microsoft)

If you're a PC user, here are the basic things you'll want to know about the latest Microsoft operating system.

Can my PC run on Windows 7?

Before lining up to purchase Windows 7 to upgrade an existing computer, users should try downloading the Upgrade Advisor from Microsoft. Microsoft boasts that Windows 7 is an easier, faster operating system than its predecessors. Windows Vista users should be able to do a relatively painless upgrade, but an upgrade from Windows XP can be more complicated.

The Upgrade Advisor, found on Microsoft's website, will tell you whether there are any compatibility issues with Windows 7 and your computer. While Microsoft says most applications that work on Vista will work on Windows 7, it is important to note that the company does not recommend upgrading directly from Windows XP. So, Windows XP users will likely need to back up all their existing files, install Windows 7 on their computer from scratch, re-install all their programs, and then copy files such as documents and pictures back onto their hard drive.

What are the system requirements?

All of the following requirements are necessary to run any of the three different flavours of the Windows 7 operating system:

• 1GHz CPU.
• 1 gigabyte of memory (RAM).
• At least 16 gigabytes of available hard disk space for the 32-bit version; or at least 20GB of available disk space for the 64-bit version.
• A DirectX 9 graphics processor with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver.

Is my software and hardware compatible with Windows 7?

The Microsoft website has an extensive list of software and hardware that is compatible with Windows 7, as well as those that have problems. If one of your favourite applications is not on the list, that doesn't necessarily mean it won't work, though. If a program isn't working after you've installed it, right-click on the application's icon and select "troubleshoot compatibility." You will be able to tweak the compatibility settings in Windows 7 to try to get the program to run properly.

What are the new design elements?

Microsoft says Windows 7 improves upon the Aero graphical interface released in Windows Vista. The new tools, Aero Peek, Aero Shake and Snap, allow users to manage multiple opened folders on their desktop.

Aero Peek allows people to quickly view what's on their desktop by simply clicking a button on the desktop to make all the opened windows transparent.

With a quick "shake" (clicking a window and moving it from side to side with your mouse), Aero Shake will minimize all the other windows on the screen.

With Snap, users can grab two windows and attach one to each side of the screen. The windows will automatically resize themselves so that each one takes up half the screen.

The Aero platform also provides additional desktop themes, giving the user more options to customize their desktop.

How is the user interface different?

Similar to Apple's latest Mac OS, Windows 7 allows you to pin documents, folders and applications to the taskbar. With a feature called Jump Lists, people can right-click any pinned item on the taskbar to reveal the most frequently used elements. For example, right-clicking a pinned Microsoft Word icon would reveal a list of the last documents used.

Microsoft has also made it easier to search for documents on your computer. Expanding on Vista's desktop search system, Windows 7 has a new feature that allows users to search any folder or library by entering key words in a search box window. It will provide suggestions for other search options and enable you to fine-tune any search with additional filters. The new feature will allow you to view preview files from your query directly in the folder instead of opening the document.

Is there improved security?

The business version of Windows 7 has an encryption system called BitLocker (it's not included with the Home Premium edition). BitLocker is meant to protect sensitive files on your computer from hackers and theft.

Windows 7 also has improved parental controls. The new settings will allow parents to track their children's computer usage and even enable them to control when and how long a child can use the computer. This feature can also control what type of game a child can play based on the game's rating.

Is it faster than my old OS?

To streamline its operating system, Microsoft has removed some of the applications that were built into previous releases. These include: Windows Calendar, Windows Mail, Windows Movie Make, Windows Photo Gallery, Outlook Express. Users who want them will now have to download these free applications from the Microsoft website.

PCMag.com compared Windows 7 with its predecessor Windows Vista. Using similar computers, PCMag.com's testing revealed that Windows 7 is significantly faster in almost all areas. However, it has yet to be confirmed whether the new operating system will run smoothly. If comments from the release of its beta version are any indication, Windows 7 is likely to be a stable OS.

How much does Windows 7 cost?

Retail prices (Canadian dollars):

• Windows 7 Ultimate: $349.99.
• Windows 7 Home Premium: $224.99.
• Windows 7 Professional: $329.99.
• Windows 7 Ultimate Upgrade: $279.99.
• Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade: $129.99.
• Windows 7 Professional Upgrade: $249.99.

( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Can my PC run on Windows 7?

MPs fight online predators who counsel suicide

MPs fight online predators who counsel suicide. The House of Commons voted unanimously in favour of a motion Wednesday that could change how the Criminal Code deals with people who counsel others over the internet to commit suicide.

The motion put forward by Harold Albrecht, Conservative MP for the Ontario riding of Kitchener-Conestoga, was a response to the death of Nadia Kajouji, an 18-year-old Carleton university student who threw herself into the Rideau River in March 2008.

Nadia Kajouji committed suicide in March 2008. Police discovered that a 47-year-old male nurse from Minnesota — who was posing as a 28-year-old woman online — might have encouraged Kajouji via an internet chat room to commit suicide. (Courtesy of Nadia Kajouji's family)

During the investigation into Kajouji's death, police discovered that a 47-year-old male nurse from Minnesota — who was posing as a 28-year-old woman online — might have encouraged Kajouji via an internet chat room to commit suicide. No charges have been laid in the case, under either U.S. or Canadian law.

Definition of 'aiding and abetting' unclear

Section 241 of the Canadian Criminal Code says "everyone who … counsels a person to commit suicide, or aids or abets a person to commit suicide, whether suicide ensues or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years."

Albrecht would like to see the definition of aiding and abetting clarified to include the use of technologies like internet chat rooms. Wednesday's motion isn't legally binding, but Albrecht intends to work with the federal Justice Department to draft a formal bill.

"I think clarifying it in the law will give that deterrent message to close that potential loophole, and there will be adequate pressure to make sure that another story like Nadia's never occurs, " Albrecht said.

After nearly two years of suffering, Wednesday's motion brought some peace to Kajouji's family.

"All those people over there, all the MPs, they're doing something for Nadia and other kids. And it makes me very happy. It makes me very proud, " Mohamed Kajouji, Nadia's father said.

Marc Kajouji, Nadia's brother, was relieved to see something positive come from his sister's death.

"There's a lot of joy today surrounding me. And that's obviously because of Nadia, who's definitely smiling down on us, and very happy with the result I'm sure." ( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - MPs fight online predators who counsel suicide

Depressed woman loses benefits over Facebook photos

Depressed woman loses benefits over Facebook photos. A Quebec woman on long-term sick leave is fighting to have her benefits reinstated after her employer's insurance company cut them, she says, because of photos posted on Facebook.

Nathalie Blanchard, 29, has been on leave from her job at IBM in Bromont, Que., for the last year and a half after she was diagnosed with major depression.

The Eastern Townships woman was receiving monthly sick-leave benefits from Manulife, her insurance company, but the payments dried up this fall.

Nathalie Blanchard, shown here on a beach holiday during her sick leave. (Facebook)

When Blanchard called Manulife, the company said that "I'm available to work, because of Facebook," she told CBC News this week.

She said her insurance agent described several pictures Blanchard posted on the popular social networking site, including ones showing her having a good time at a Chippendales bar show, at her birthday party and on a sun holiday — evidence that she is no longer depressed, Manulife said.

Blanchard said she notified Manulife that she was taking a trip, and she's shocked the company would investigate her in such a manner and interpret her photos that way.

"In the moment I'm happy, but before and after I have the same problems" as before, she said.

Blanchard said that on her doctor's advice, she tried to have fun, including nights out at her local bar with friends and short getaways to sun destinations, as a way to forget her problems.

She also doesn’t understand how Manulife accessed her photos because her Facebook profile is locked and only people she approves can look at what she posts.

Insurer confirms it uses Facebook

Her lawyer Tom Lavin said Manulife's investigation was inappropriate.

"I don't think for judging a mental state that Facebook is a very good tool," he said, adding that he has requested another psychiatric evaluation for Blanchard.

"It's not as if somebody had a broken back and there was a picture of them carrying with a load of bricks," Lavin said. "My client was diagnosed with a major depression. And there were pictures of her on Facebook, in a party or having a good time. It could be that she was just trying to escape."

Manulife wouldn't comment on Blanchard's case, but in a written statement sent to CBC News, the insurer said: "We would not deny or terminate a valid claim solely based on information published on websites such as Facebook." It confirmed that it uses the popular social networking site to investigate clients.

Insurance companies must weigh information found on such sites, said Claude Distasio, a spokeswoman for the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association.

"We can't ignore it, wherever the source of the information is," she said. "We can't ignore it."

Blanchard estimated she’s lost thousands of dollars in benefits since Manulife changed her claim. ( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Depressed woman loses benefits over Facebook photos

Google to launch Chrome netbooks next year

Google to launch Chrome netbooks next year. Google plans to offer its Chrome operating system, which will let computers work without Windows and connect directly to the internet, on netbooks by Christmas next year.

The company, in a webcast news conference on Thursday, touted Chrome as a revolutionary approach that will speed users' access to the internet by making computers feel more like televisions, which work right away after being turned on.

Google's Chrome operating system will feature an interface that looks like a cross between a web browser and a smartphone.

"This is a fundamentally different model of computing," said Sundar Pichai, vice-president of product management at Google. "We're going to go through a paradigm shift."

The problem with current operating systems, such as Microsoft's Windows or Apple's OS, is that they require a sometimes lengthy boot-up to load all sorts of functions and applications that most people never use, Pichai said. Chrome does away with most of that process and takes users directly to their web browser. Pichai said current boot-up time is seven seconds, but Google is working to shave that further.

Google is working with several computer makers to combine the operating system with hardware, which will be slightly bigger than current netbooks and will feature full-size keyboards, he said. The devices will use the wireless "n" wi-fi standard to connect to the internet and will have solid state flash storage, rather than the disc drives found in many computers.

Chrome, which is free for hardware makers, is also being designed with laptop and desktop computers in mind, Pichai said, but for now the company is focused on netbooks. Google expects the Chrome-based netbooks to retail for about the same as existing models on the market.

The company also announced it was making the operating system completely open source, so that anyone who wants to develop applications for it can do so. Pichai demonstrated that Microsoft, the company that Chrome takes direct aim at, has already developed its own applications that work within Google's web browser, also called Chrome. Users can open their Excel spreadsheet documents, for example, through a web-based version of Microsoft's software.

Chrome will consequently push further the idea of cloud computing, where all of a user's files are stored on the internet rather than on their computer's hard drive. Critics have said the concept is problematic because users could lose control of their data or would be at the mercy of outages at service providers, such as Google.

Pichai countered such questions from reporters by suggesting that users will always own their own data and that online outages are far less frequent than problems that occur with the computers themselves. The cloud's reliability "compares very, very well," he said. ( cbc.ca )

READ MORE - Google to launch Chrome netbooks next year