Greece is losing even the internet

People in Greece are also finding that their cloud storage subscriptions are being disabled because the regular monthly payments to Apple for iCloud, or Google for Dropbox, for example, are being cut off.

NEW YORK: We recently reported that capital controls were stopping people in Greece from buying songs on iTunes. Greece put capital controls -- which limit withdrawals from bank accounts and a 60 per day cash limit from ATMs -- in place on June 29. Since then, people and businesses have started to lose access to the sort of internet services the rest of us take for granted -- as iTunes, PayPal, cloud storage, and app stores -- because they are unable to send money out of the country.

While accessing iTunes is probably the least of Greece's problems, this does show how centralised the internet actually is, with many services hosted in just one country, often not your country.

The problem with iTunes isn't that people don't have enough money in their account to pay for a track. They are unable to buy even a single song for 0.99 using a Greek credit or debit card because Apple is an American company, and making a payment to them would mean money leaving Greece to the US.

People in Greece are also finding that their cloud storage subscriptions are being disabled because the regular monthly payments to Apple for iCloud, or Google for Dropbox, for example, are being cut off. While iCloud gives you 5GB for free, that's often not enough to back up multiple devices, photos and apps.

People also aren't able to use PayPal to send money or make payments to anyone outside the country. Mic reports that people are also unable to send money via PayPal to someone else in Greece, because by sending money through PayPal, funds move across servers outside the country. Some of our sources in Greece have said that they think Paypal has stopped anyone in the country sending funds at all.

Money transfer companies such as Western Union and Money Gram have stopped operating in Greece for now, CNBC reports. While Transferwise can't send funds out of the country, it is still letting letting people receive money from other countries. A spokesperson for the company told CNBC that "the controls mean that all and any payments from Greece are on hold and subject to further notice," and that Transferwise is monitoring the situation closely. We have reached out to them for more details.

These restrictions have caused some big problems for Greek startups, who have been unable to pay for cloud storage, ads, domain hosting or credit card processing services from providers outside Greece since the capital controls came into place. Some have managed to convince their providers to keep their accounts open for the time being, FastCompany reports, while others have been helped by friends and family overseas.

For the rest, the internet did come in handy. The founders of Greek startup Bugsense, John Vlachoyiannis and Panos Papadopoulos, have started a site allowing Greek startups to apply for help to cover their costs from foreign supporters, with Marc Andreessen even pledging his support.

Fast Company points out that the last country to impose capital controls was Iceland in 2008. Back then, companies were less reliant on cloud storage, and the country had built up plenty of data centres of its own. But Greek startups are going to have to find a way around these restrictions if capital controls stay in place

The Internet has come to this: Push-button pizza ordering

Transportation company Cabify will use Telefónica smart buttons to let people order a car.Telefónica

We started with Internet-enabled PCs, moved to Internet-enabled phones and now are strapping on Internet-enabled watches. What comes next? Perhaps something as simple as an Internet-enabled button.

Telefónica, a Spanish carrier with network operations in many countries around the world, on Wednesday unveiled what it calls a smart button along with a couple partners who'll bring it to real-world tasks. Cabify will let people order car transportation by pushing the button; a tiny printer inside will print a receipt with information about the driver that's been dispatched. Shipping company Seur will let customers push the button to generate a request for a package to be collected. An earlier test with Telepizza let people use the smart buttons to order pizzas.

It's similar to Amazon's Dash Buttons, which enable one-click ordering of household products. But Telefónica's buttons use cellular networks, not home Wi-Fi, and thus can be placed anywhere in a city or town. And by tapping standard smartphone networks, they can be used across the world, not just on Telefónica's networks.

The smart buttons represent the latest twist in a burgeoning category of products called the Internet of Things, which spreads networked computing to everything from traffic lights to door locks. It's a market in which many companies are keen to get a foothold, since global spending on devices and services related to the Internet of Things is expected to grow from $656 billion in 2014 to $1.7 trillion in 2020, according to research firm IDC.

Pushing a smart button to get a pizza may seem uncomfortably close to behavioral experiments in which pigeons peck a key to get a reward, but lacing computer-powered, network-linked automation through our world could offer convenience and utility, not just instant gratification.

Telefónica plans to offer an unbranded version of the smart button for other companies that want to customize it, the company said. A smart button could be handy for letting people hail a taxi, vote on which mural they like best in a public art installation or alert a laundromat that a washer needs maintenance. The devices can rely on battery power or be plugged in.

Smart buttons vs. smartphones

But the idea faces a big challenge in the real world: smartphones already bring the Internet to people outside their homes. A taxi app can flag down a cab from wherever you are, not just wherever a button happens to be, and smartphones offer a lot more sophistication, like a way to pay for that car ride, too. Companies considering the idea also might prefer people to use their own phones to avoid pranksters and vandals who might abuse the button system.

Telefonica wasn't available to comment on the potential abuses the buttons may face in public.

Many Internet of Things companies sell gadgets, but Telefónica sees the technology as a new way to sell network access, too. Still, it's hedging its bets: Telefónica also invested in a French startup called Sigfox that offers its own network specifically for the Internet of Things. The Sigfox network offers long-range communications, low power consumption and low cost, but only carries tiny amounts of data compared to mobile phone networks. Sigfox could serve as an alternative network connecting nontraditional devices like washing machines and dog collars.

But for now Telefonica's smart buttons use the regular phone network. Each smart button has a cellular-based SIM (subscriber identity module) card inside to identify the device on the network. SIM cards, which are tiny computer chips embedded in a sliver of plastic, carry an ID number and a digital key to authenticate a device on a network, and are found in every smartphone.

One major SIM card maker, Gemalto, is promoting a more rugged alternative it calls MIM, or machine identification modules, for industrial uses on the Internet of Things. One example it announced this week: an oceanography consulting firm called HidroMares will build them into sensors that detect wave motions, currents, and the salinity, depth and temperature of water at ports. The sensors are fixed to buoys and piers help port operators make navigation safer and faster.

Marine shipping may not be as fun as holding a spontaneous pizza picnic in the park. But at a deeper level, it comes down to the same thing: wiring the Internet into everything we do.

Net neutrality: Simplest explanation

EDITED BY ADITYA KUMAR SAROJ

ORIGINAL BY Nikhil Pahwa & Vikas SN

Here's how we can describe net neutrality. 

Telecom operators/ISPs are access services providers, and can control either how much you access, what you access, how fast you access and how much you pay to access content and services on the Internet.

It’s important for access to knowledge, services and free speech, as well as freedom and ease of doing business online, for this access to be neutral:

– All sites must be equally accessible- The same access speed at the telco/ISP level for each (independent of telco selection)
– The same data cost for access to each site (per KB/MB).

This means, Net Neutrality is about:
– No telecom-style licensing of Internet companies (see this and this)
– No gateways (Internet.org, Airtel OneTouch Internet, Data VAS), censorshipor selection;
– No speeding up of specific websites (that may or may not pay telcos)
– No “zero rating” or making some sites free over others (and that goes for you too, Wikipedia and twitter).

Recently, Barack Obama himself stood up for net neutrality. Now, it's India's turn to stand up for net neutrality and protest against programs like Airtel Zero. Use the #NetNeutrality, like many others, to make the internet equal for all.

Zuckerberg: Carriers will connect the world, not sci-fi

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg speaks at Mobile World Congress 2015.Stephen Shankland/CNET

BARCELONA -- It's regular carriers and regular technology that will bring Internet access to the billions of people who lack it today, not sci-fi ideas like Google's Project Loon balloons or Project Titan drones, Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg thinks.

"People like talking about that stuff because it's sexy," Zuckerberg said of such departures from networks delivered by plain old cell phone towers and fiber-optic lines. "That's at the fringe of the real work that's going on. Ninety percent of the people in the world already live within range of the network."

Instead, it's carriers that will do most of the work, he said in an onstage interview here at the Mobile World Congress show. That view will doubtless be received warmly at the show, which is run by those network operators. But Zuckerberg has a stake in the work, too, having championed an effort called Internet.org to bring Internet access to the world's billions who lack it today.

The core idea behind Internet.org is to offer free access to a number of Internet services -- including Facebook, of course -- to get people online. First carriers build the infrastructure to support those new customers, then many of those customers upgrade to higher-end, more profitable mobile network plans. It's a broad vision -- and one that will likely transform parts of the world as much as wealthy countries have already changed.

And it'll be good for network operators, too, Zuckerberg said. "It's a profitable model for our partners."

Protecting carrier revenue

One concern, that paying customers would move to the free tier, turns out not to be a worry, he added. "The feedback from partners is not only do more people start adopting data, but people use more voice and SMS and pay for that even more. We've seen a lot of cases where ARPU [average revenue per user] goes up," he said. "Even in countries like Colombia, where half the people are already on the Internet, there's massive upside."

The partnership isn't always easy. Jon Fredrik Baksaas, CEO of the major global carrier Telenor Group, said Facebook's WhatsApp text-message app eats into carriers' SMS revenue and erodes the customer relationship with carriers.

"The messaging side is an important revenue driver in the old telecom world," Baksaas said, joining Zuckerberg on stage. Even though carriers are shifting to accommodate Net-based services WhatsApp is still an issue. "This is a point of tension between the operator community and Facebook, because we don't want to see that revenue stream move too quickly."

For his part, Zuckerberg said he's sensitive to the issue. In the Internet.org suite of services, WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger are never an option, he said.

"Those would be too cannibalistic," Zuckerberg said, meaning that they'd gobble up other revenue sources.

Carriers new face of Internet.org

Facebook is a founding Internet.org partner, but Zuckerberg thinks it's time for his carrier partners to move to the fore.

"Going forward the face of Internet.org needs to be the companies doing the work, laying the fiber in the ground, building the infrastructure that's actually connecting people in the world," Zuckerberg said.

There's still a role for sci-fi ideas, Zuckerberg said, though he didn't mention by name Google's Project Loon, which delivers Internet access from roving high-altitude balloons, and Project Titan, which does the same from solar-powered drone airplanes.

"The operators are doing a good job reaching people in rural areas," Zuckerberg said, "but a lot of the technology isn't efficient enough to cost-effectively serve people in rural areas."

UK spy agency's Internet surveillance was illegal, court rules

Edward Snowden revealed vast troves of information about surveillance activities by the NSA.The Guardian/YouTube screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET

A top UK intelligence agency, the Government Communications Headquarters, engaged in unlawful spying until late 2014, a tribunal ruled Friday.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled Friday that the GCHQ's use of intercepted data collected by the US National Security Agency for its own investigations was illegal. The tribunal found that through its partnership with the US agency and sharing of data through the NSA's widely criticized Prism and other programs, the UK agency accessed personal information on individuals and violated their human rights, specifically to privacy and free speech.

Since December, however, GCHQ has been in compliance with disclosure laws, detailing to authorities the data it's receiving and how it's using it, the tribunal said.

The IPT, which has never ruled against the intelligence agency in its 15-year history despite being one of the few courts to have that power, said Friday that the GCHQ for years failed to provide adequate disclosures on what kind of information it was obtaining.

The case against the GCHQ was brought by several human rights organizations, including Liberty and Privacy International. The charged were leveled after former NSA contractor Edward Snowden two years ago began exposing details on the US agency's widespread collection of user data on the Internet through its Prism program.

Launched in 2007, Prism was initially designed as an antiterrorism tool that allowed the NSA to access Internet information from technology companies and analyze that for possible threats. The program, according to the leaked documents, allowed the NSA to collect everything from emails to chat information to photos. Practically everything that is shared on the Internet is collected through the program and subsequently swept by the NSA. That data, according to the reports, was then shared with the GCHQ to help that agency in its own efforts.

While government officials in support of the NSA and GCHQ have argued that data is collected only with a warrant and for use in antiterrorism activities, critics have said that Prism provides an unimpeded opportunity for the government agencies to collect whatever they want, whenever they want, from anyone they want.

The ruling may not amount to much more than a slap on the wrist. While the IPT found the GCHQ in violation of human rights in previous years, the tribunal said that the agency is now in full compliance with the law. In a statement, GCHQ says that the "judgment focuses primarily on a discrete and purely historical issue," adding that it believes the ruing shows that its agency was actually in compliance with guidelines on privacy.

At issue, according to the GCHQ, was its initial unwillingness to share certain information on its activities to the public. By not sharing that "two paragraphs" of information, which the GCHQ did not identify in its statement, the IPT found the agency "in contravention of human rights law."

The intelligence agency emphasized the positive aspect of the tribunal's Friday ruling.

"We are pleased that the Court has once again ruled that the UK's bulk interception regime is fully lawful," a GCHQ spokesperson said in defense of the agency.The person continued:

Today's IPT ruling re-affirms that the processes and safeguards within the intelligence-sharing regime were fully adequate at all times - it is simply about the amount of detail about those processes and safeguards that needed to be in the public domain. We welcome the important role the IPT has played in ensuring that the public regime is sufficiently detailed.

By its nature, much of GCHQ's work must remain secret. But we are working with the rest of Government to improve public understanding about what we do and the strong legal and policy framework that underpins all our work. We continue to do what we can to place information safely into the public domain that can help to achieve this.

Broadband internet? Maybe not!

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday rewrote the definition of high-speed Internet, and chances are, your connection isn't up to snuff.

The FCC commissioners voted 3 to 2 in support of the change. They are (left to right): Ajit Pai, Mignon Clyburn, Tom Wheeler (chairman), Jessica Rosenworcel, and Michael O'Rielly.FCC

The FCC, tasked with overseeing the rules that govern the Internet, raised the standard for broadband to 25 megabits per second from 4 Mbps, while raising the upload speed to 3 Mbps from 1 Mbps. The commissioners voted 3 to 2 in support of the change, though the dissenting Republican commissioners blasted the move as "overreaching." The change came as the FCC published its 2015 Broadband Progress Report, which is what Congress uses to assess the US broadband market.

The new definition effectively means that millions of Americans subscribing to Internet service that clocks in at less than 25 Mbps are no longer considered "broadband" subscribers. The average speed of service delivered in the US is 10 Mbps. Using this new threshold, the agency determined in its report that true broadband speeds are not being delivered in a timely fashion.

The agency's report found that 55 million Americans, or 17 percent of the population, lack access to advanced broadband services. The bulk of Americans who do not have access to such speeds are in rural areas. The report indicates that 53 percent of rural Americans lack broadband with download speeds of 25 Mbps. This is compared to 8 percent of Americans living in urban areas. The report also indicates that 20 percent of rural Americans don't even have access to the previous standard of 4 Mbps downloads.

A contentious decision

The move has once again pitted Chairman Tom Wheeler, a Democrat appointed by President Barack Obama, against the two Republicans on the commission, Ajit Pai and Michael O'Rielly, selected by the Republican-controlled Congress. Wheeler says the change in definition is an aspirational target that makes sense given the marketing claims of broadband providers that profess higher speeds are necessary for the ever increasing demands of consumers.

"Our challenge is not to hide behind self-serving lobbying statements, but to recognize reality," Wheeler said at the meeting. "And our challenge is to help make that reality available to all."

But the two dissenters on the FCC called the move an overreach of the agency's authority and argued that the new standard is arbitrary. Pai said that a better judge of what is considered broadband is to look at the services that consumers actually purchase.

"Seventy-one percent of consumers who can purchase fixed 25 Mbps service -- over 70 million households -- choose not to," he said.

The FCC noted in the Broadband Progress Report that the previous definition for broadband at 4 Mbps for downloads and 1 Mbps for uploads, adopted in 2010, was "inadequate."

Strong opinions on both sides

Consumer groups hailed the report's findings.

"The FCC's re-evaluation of the broadband marketplace is long overdue," Edyael Casaperalta, Internet rights fellow at Public Knowledge, said in a statement. "For too long, the FCC has gotten by with an outdated standard for broadband, and as a result its analysis of the marketplace grew increasingly antiquated."

The Communications Workers of America union also applauded the effort, arguing that the updated standard will create more jobs.

"Our nation's economic strength and social welfare -- as well as the future of good jobs in the telecom sector -- requires world leadership in the quality and capacity of our communications networks, and today's action by the FCC will move us forward toward regaining that leadership," the labor union said in a statement.

But conservative groups derided the move.

"The FCC has been playing political games with the '706 report' since 2010, when it suddenly declared deployment inadequate in order to justify its Net neutrality regulations," said Berin Szoka, president of TechFreedom, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that generally backs the efforts of broadband providers.

Foundation for Net neutrality battle?

The FCC's Republican commissioners believe the broadband vote is just a setup for the agency's intent to settle the Net neutrality fight with new regulations and to push local municipalities to go around state laws and build their own Internet networks. (Net neutrality is the principle of treating all Internet traffic the same.) They believe the stricter speed guidelines paint the broadband industry as less competitive, justifying the FCC's moves.

"The ultimate goal is to seize new, virtually limitless authority to regulate the broadband marketplace," Pai said during the agency's meeting Thursday. "A thriving marketplace must be found to have failed so that the agency can regulate it back to health."

At the heart of the Net neutrality debate is a provision in the new rules that would reclassify broadband as a Title II service under the Telecommunications Act. This reclassification would essentially allow the FCC to apply regulation originally established for the traditional telephone network to broadband infrastructure. While Net neutrality supporters hail the reclassification as a way to put the new rules on firmer legal ground, opponents including large Internet service providers and conservative Republicans say it would stifle investment in networks.

The FCC is also set to rule on two petitions that will override state laws in North Carolina and Tennessee that prohibit municipalities from building or expanding broadband networks.

The agency will vote on both the Net neutrality proposal and the municipal broadband initiative at its February 26 meeting.

Elon Musk is trying to bring the Internet to space

SpaceX's CRS-5 Dragon spacecraft in orbit. The company's latest project aims to connect Earthlings to the Net using thousands of satellites.SpaceX

Elon Musk, the man who's determined to move our civilization to Mars, will also tackle creating an Internet in space.

The CEO of Tesla Motors and SpaceX said Friday night that he will use a fleet of satellites to make the Internet speedier and to bring it to those without access, according to media reports of a private event in Seattle. Details of the plan were shared before the event with Bloomberg.

While this new network would initially benefit only those of us on Earth, Musk said he has much loftier plans: using the profits to build a Martian city.

"We see it as a long-term revenue source for SpaceX to be able to fund a city on Mars," Musk told Bloomberg. He didn't offer specifics on how he'll make money off the project, but he did mention the possibility of selling satellites after the network is completed. SpaceX did not return a request for comment.

To create the new network, SpaceX will build and launch roughly 4,000 satellites orbiting about 750 miles above earth, GeekWire reported.

Musk is known for his determination to colonize Earth's relatively nearby neighbor, with plans to put humans on Mars by the mid 2020s. A member of the so-called "PayPal Mafia" -- co-founders of the payment service who have found continued success after selling the company to eBay -- Musk founded SpaceX in 2002 to "to revolutionize space technology, with the ultimate goal of enabling people to live on other planets," according to the SpaceX website. It won a $2.6 billion contract from NASA last year, becoming one of the first private companies -- the other is Boeing -- set to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station, beginning as early as 2017.

SpaceX unveiled its first manned spacecraft, the Dragon V2, in May. The craft is intended for trips to and from the space station, and the company successfully sent a cargo capsule to the ISS this month, but the "reusable" rocket crashed into its floating landing pad in the Atlantic Ocean.

Musk isn't the only space enthusiast who wants to make it to Mars. Living on the Red Planet has been a longtime science-fiction fantasy, and in recent years, a goal of many technologists. Mars One, for example, is trying to fund a human mission to Mars in 2025 by offering investors interplanetary product placement.And now it looks like Musk sees his space Internet project as another way of getting him to Mars. The network would take at least five years to develop and cost around $10 billion, he told Bloomberg. Instead of sending data through a network that uses fiber optic cables, the proposed system would bounce signals from satellite to satellite. Musk said the setup would also connect underserved communities that don't have Net access. The project will be overseen at SpaceX's new Seattle headquarters.

US spying scandal will 'break the Internet,' says Google's Schmidt

Sen. Ron Wyden moderated a discussion between top tech firm leaders on the impact of the US spying scandal on the Internet economy. Prognosis: It's going to get worse before it gets better.Seth Rosenblatt/CNET

PALO ALTO, Calif. -- The impact of US government surveillance on tech firms and the economy is going to get worse before it gets better, leaders at some of the biggest tech firms warned US Sen. Ron Wyden on Wednesday during a roundtable on the impact of US government surveillance on the digital economy.

The senior Democratic senator from Oregon took the floor at the Palo Alto High School gymnasium -- where he played high school basketball well enough to earn a college scholarship for his court-side abilities more than 50 years ago -- to discuss the economic impact and future risks of US government surveillance on technology firms.

Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, who has been outspoken on the topic, pulled no punches with his assessment of how the spying scandal has and will continue to impact Google and other tech companies.

The impact is "severe and is getting worse," Schmidt said. "We're going to wind up breaking the Internet."

Also on the panel with Schmidt was Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith, another critic who became more outspoken of government surveillance after Edward Snowden leaked National Security Agency documents in 2013 that showed a much wider federal spying apparatus than previously believed.

"Just as people won't put their money in a bank they won't trust, people won't use an Internet they won't trust," Smith said.

Panelist Ramsey Homsany, general counsel for online storage company Dropbox, said the trust between customers and businesses that is at the core of the Internet's economic engine has begun to "rot it from the inside out."

"The trust element is extremely insidious," Homsany said. "It's about personal emails, it's about photos, it's about plans, it's about medical records."

The documents leaked by Snowden indicate that the US government has been collecting a record of most calls made within the US, including the initiating and receiving phone numbers, and the length of the call; emails, Facebook posts and instant messages of an unspecified number of people; and the vast majority of unencrypted Internet traffic including searches and social media posts. Documents from Snowden show that the British equivalent of the NSA, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), has a similar program.

Trouble abroad

In prepared remarks to open the roundtable, Wyden noted that he warned back in 2011 that people were going to be stunned and angry when they found out how the US government had been "secretly applying its surveillance authority" to its citizens. What he wasn't counting on was the international backlash.

Some of the international pushback is in response to data collection by tech companies, not the US government. Europe's new and controversial "right to be forgotten" law, which says European citizens have a right to ask search engines to remove any results that might infringe on their privacy, is causing headaches for Google. Critics contend that Google policies placed data collection over privacy.

The cost of building data centers in each country that a tech firm wants to do business in could wind up destroying US tech firms, Schmidt and Smith warned.The tech execs on the panel were most upset and scared about international efforts to impose "data localization," as Microsoft's Smith put it, referring to a burgeoning efforts by countries to force companies to build data centers based within their borders.

Schmidt called data localization a "national emergency." Tech titans have yet to go in-depth as to the actual financial impact data localization has had on them, but in addition to the costs of having to build at least one separate data center for each country that demanded it, data localization could also subject the data to local laws in a way that tech firms worry would erode user trust -- and their ability to trade on that trust -- even further.

Smith noted that 96 percent of the world does not live in the US, and that the American tech economy depends on convincing them that American tech services are trustworthy. "Foreign data centers would compromise American [economic] growth" and leadership, he said.

Abroad, efforts are already underway to force international tech companies to be more respectful of their own national interests -- efforts that could erode consumer trust further, said Wyden. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said publicly that Germany is looking at European email service providers so that their messages "don't have to go across the Atlantic." The government of Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff is considering forcing US tech firms to build data centers in Brazil, if they want to do business with Brazil.

The biggest indication of the decline of America's ability to guide the Internet, according to Wyden, is that Chinese officials told the senator earlier this summer that they considered the Chinese theft of US tech trade secrets no different than US government surveillance of foreign governments and firms.

Rebuilding trust

Part of reclaiming leadership in the digital economy since the Snowden document leaks has been efforts by tech companies to encrypt user data to protect it. Facebook has used its leverage to help convince tech companies to implement tougher webmail encryption standards, while Google and Yahoo are seeking to push the envelope of how encryption can safeguard webmail.

Panelist Colin Stretch, general counsel for Facebook, called efforts to encrypt user data "a key business objective of all of us."

"I'd be fundamentally surprised if anybody takes the foot off the pedal of building encryption into their products," he said.

Wyden reiterated his stance that he is not opposed to all government surveillance: He supports Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments from 2008, which allows the director of National Intelligence and the US attorney general to team up to target non-US citizens located outside the US.

While Wyden and the panelists discussed the need to revise American laws as the first step to regain the trust of American citizens and international governments, they didn't talk about what to do with the data that's already been collected.

Wyden told CNET after the panel that he had no plans at the moment to address the data that the government has currently collected.

"I have to reflect on that," he said, but added, "The cat's out of the bag. I want to get policies right for the future."

"There's no question that Washington, DC, does overreach well," quipped the senator.

Wyden concluded with a promise to make Congress take action to preserve the digital economy.

"The message here today is that there is a clear and present danger to the Internet economy," he said. "The reality is that we can pass a good bipartisan bill by the end of the year."

Experts: Internet of Things and Wearables Will Dominate by 2025

By Samantha Murphy Kelly

Experts believe the Internet of Things — the concept that all devices, objects and systems could be connected and share information in the future — will have a widespread effect on the way we live our everyday lives by 2025.
According to a new report conducted by the Pew Research Center, about 83% of the 1,600 industry experts surveyed believe the category will dominate the mainstream in about 11 years, but there will be slow progress to reach this level, despite today's trends and hype about it being the next big thing.

"Many experts say the rise of embedded and wearable computing will bring the next revolution in digital technology," wrote Janna Anderson, director of Elon Univeristy's Imagining the Internet Center and author of the report. "They say the upsides are enhanced health, convenience, productivity, safety and vastly more useful information for people and organizations. The downsides: challenges to personal privacy, over-hyped expectations and tech complexity that boggles us."

Not surprisingly, wearables (smartwatches and fitness trackers) are among the top categories expected to take off in the Internet of Things. But other areas, such as the home — people who want to control home services and appliances remotely, from thermostats to sprinklers — are high on the list, too.
On a basic level, some household items are already connected to the Internet, such as Samsung's Internet-connected refrigerator, which tweets and streams music from Pandora, and the Nest thermostat. But there are still limitations; every company prefers to use its proprietary technology, which often isn't compatible with other platforms. Not only do companies need to work together so their products can interact with each other, but there are also issues related to privacy that stand in the way.

"The realities of this data-drenched world raise substantial concerns about privacy and people’s abilities to control their own lives," the report read.

"The realities of this data-drenched world raise substantial concerns about privacy and people’s abilities to control their own lives," the report read. "If everyday activities are monitored and people are generating informational outputs, the level of profiling and targeting will grow and amplify social, economic and political struggles."

Meanwhile, experts believe communities will start to embed devices and smartphone apps with information about transportation, pollution levels and even deliver news about electricity and water more efficiently this way. The environment — real-time data about fields, oceans and soil moisture — is also on the radar for tech growth, as is the goods and services industry which can use sensors to track materials more quickly.

The study participants also expressed another concern: not knowing how to fix things when they break, and the possibility of people recasting their human relationships with technology-based ones.

Twitter battle in Turkey heats up, spreads to YouTube -- reports

Turkey's battle over Net censorship is heating up, with the government there reportedly blocking a method that let citizens sidestep a Twitter ban, the White House expressing "serious concern" over the ban, and Google reportedly refusing requests from Turkish authorities to take down YouTube videos that cast the prime minister in a critical light.

Bloomberg cited Turkish newspapers in reporting that the Turkish government had blocked on Saturday a Google service that enabled citizens to tweet. Setting a PC or mobile device to use Google's DNS IP address of 8.8.8.8 had let people slip past the ban (and graffiti displaying the phrase "DNS 8.8.8.8" was even spotted around Turkey, helping spread the word). But on Saturday the government prevented access to Google DNS, Bloomberg said.

Yesterday, the White House issued a statement condemning Turkey's blockage of "access to basic communication tools." As reported by The Switch, Press Secretary Jay Carney delivered the remarks, saying, "We oppose this restriction on the Turkish people's access to information, which undermines their ability to exercise freedoms of expression and association and runs contrary to the principles of open governance that are critical to democratic governance." Carney said the White House had conveyed its concerns to the Turkish government.

"We support a free and open Internet throughout the world and are concerned whenever and wherever it comes under threat," Google told the Journal in a statement. The paper's source said Google feels "an immediate threat" of a YouTube ban in Turkey.Meanwhile, Google ignored requests from Turkish officials to remove YouTube videos that allege government corruption, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing unnamed sources. The videos include clips that feature a recording, allegedly of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in which Erdogen seems to instruct his son to hide money from investigators. Erdogen has called the recording a fake.

On Thursday, Turkish courts took Twitter offline for the country's 76 million citizens following actions by Erdogan. An unabashed critic of social networks, Erdogan has threatened to "wipe out" the site in the wake of a political corruption scandal that has embarrassed the government through news, videos, and images posted on the microblogging site. Members of Erdogen's government face local elections March 30.

(Credit: Twitter; screenshot by CNET)

Reuters reported Saturday that the Turkish government said Twitter was being used "to carry out systematic character assassinations by circulating illegally acquired recordings, fake and fabricated records of wiretapping." The news service quoted a statement from the prime minister's office that said, "It is difficult to comprehend Twitter's indifference and its biased and prejudiced stance. We believe that this attitude is damaging to the brand image of the company in question and creates an unfair and inaccurate impression of our country."

Reuters also quoted an unnamed senior official of the Turkish government as saying that talks with Twitter that began on Friday are continuing and that "the process is going positively."

"As far as we are concerned, when the court rulings are implemented the problems will be resolved and the block on Twitter will be lifted," the official told Reuters.

"We stand with our users in Turkey who rely on Twitter as a vital communications platform," Twitter said in a tweet on Friday. "We hope to have full access returned soon."

Reuters also said many people on Twitter were reporting that the reportedly blocked DNS settings were working by the early afternoon in Turkey.

Internet now used by 87 percent of American adults, says poll

Almost 90 percent of American adults surveyed use the Internet, and almost all say that the Internet has been a good thing for them personally.

Among the 1,000 American adults surveyed by Pew Research in January, 87 percent now use the Internet. And that number is even higher for certain groups. Internet use was claimed by 99 percent of people in households that earn $75,000 or more, 97 percent of adults ages 18-29, and 97 percent of those with college degrees.

A full 68 percent of those polled connect to the Internet via mobile devices. On a related note, ownership of cell phones jumped to 90 percent in the new poll from 53 percent in Pew's first survey back in 2000. Smartphone ownership surged to 58 percent this year from 35 percent in 2011.

How do the people surveyed view the Internet and technology in general?

The Internet was seen as a good thing personally for 90 percent of those polled, a bad thing by only 6 percent, and a combination of the two by 3 percent. And the Internet was deemed a good thing for society by 76 percent, a bad thing by 15 percent, and a mixture of the two by 8 percent.

A hefty 53 percent of all Internet users said the Internet would be "very hard" to give up, with most of those citing job-related reasons or other essential needs. And 49 percent of cell phone owners said the same thing about their devices.

The Internet is sometimes perceived as unfriendly territory due to the nasty comments, hostility, and arguments that mark many online forums and other sites. But 70 percent of those polled said they'd been treated kindly or generously by their fellow Internet users. Only 25 percent reported that they were treated unkindly or had been attacked.

Further, 56 percent said they've seen online groups help a person or community resolve a problem. Only 25 percent said they left an online group because the interaction was too heated or the members were unpleasant to each other.

Pew conducted its latest poll to mark the upcoming 25th anniversary of the World Wide Web. Though the Web actually launched in 1991, parent Tim Berners-Lee wrote his initial proposal for a "distributed hypertext system" in March 1989.