Monday, May 28, 2012

The Facebook Illusion

THERE were two grand illusions about the American economy in the first decade of the 21st century. One was the idea that housing prices were no longer tethered to normal economic trends, and instead would just keep going up and up. The second was the idea that in the age of Web 2.0, we were well on our way to figuring out how to make lots and lots of money on the Internet.

Josh Haner/The New York Times Ross Doutha

The first idea collapsed along with housing prices and the stock market in 2007 and 2008. But the Web 2.0 illusion survived long enough to cost credulous investors a small fortune last week, in Facebook’s disaster of an initial public offering.

I will confess to taking a certain amount of dyspeptic pleasure from Facebook’s hard landing, which had Bloomberg Businessweek declaring the I.P.O. “the biggest flop of the decade” after five days of trading. Of all the major hubs of Internet-era excitement, Mark Zuckerberg’s social networking site has always struck me as one of the most noxious, dependent for its success on the darker aspects of online life: the zeal for constant self-fashioning and self-promotion, the pursuit of virtual forms of “community” and “friendship” that bear only a passing resemblance to the genuine article, and the relentless diminution of the private sphere in the quest for advertising dollars.

But even readers who love Facebook, or at least cannot imagine life without it, should see its stock market failure as a sign of the commercial limits of the Internet.

As The New Yorker’s John Cassidy pointed out in one of the more perceptive prelaunch pieces, the problem is not that Facebook doesn’t make money. It’s that it doesn’t make that much money, and doesn’t have an obvious way to make that much more of it, because (like so many online concerns) it hasn’t figured out how to effectively monetize its million upon millions of users. The result is a company that’s successful, certainly, but whose balance sheet is much less impressive than its ubiquitous online presence would suggest.

This “huge reach, limited profitability” problem is characteristic of the digital economy as a whole. As the George Mason University economist Tyler Cowen wrote in his 2011 e-book, “The Great Stagnation,” the Internet is a wonder when it comes to generating “cheap fun.” But because “so many of its products are free,” and because so much of a typical Web company’s work is “performed more or less automatically by the software and the servers,” the online world is rather less impressive when it comes to generating job growth.

It’s telling, in this regard, that the companies most often cited as digital-era successes, Apple and Amazon, both have business models that are firmly rooted in the production and delivery of nonvirtual goods. Apple’s core competency is building better and more beautiful appliances; Amazon’s is delivering everything from appliances to DVDs to diapers more swiftly and cheaply to your door.By contrast, the more purely digital a company’s product, the fewer jobs it tends to create and the fewer dollars it can earn per user — a reality that journalists have become all too familiar with these last 10 years, and that Facebook’s investors collided with last week. There are exceptions to this rule, but not all that many: even pornography, long one of the Internet’s biggest moneymakers, has become steadily less profitable as amateur sites and videos have proliferated and the “professionals” have lost their monopoly on smut.The German philosopher Josef Pieper wrote a book in 1952 entitled “Leisure: The Basis of Culture.” Pieper would no doubt be underwhelmed by the kind of culture that flourishes online, but leisure is clearly the basis of the Internet. From the lowbrow to the highbrow, LOLcats to Wikipedia, vast amounts of Internet content are created by people with no expectation of remuneration. The “new economy,” in this sense, isn’t always even a commercial economy at all. Instead, as Slate’s Matthew Yglesias has suggested, it’s a kind of hobbyist’s paradise, one that’s subsidized by surpluses from the old economy it was supposed to gradually replace.

A glance at the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ most recent unemployment numbers bears this reality out. Despite nearly two decades of dot-com enthusiasm, the information sector is still quite small relative to other sectors of the economy; it currently has one of the nation’s higher unemployment rates; and it’s one of the few sectors where unemployment has actually risen over the last year.None of this makes the Internet any less revolutionary. But it’s created a cultural revolution more than an economic one. Twitter is not the Ford Motor Company; Google is not General Electric. And except when he sells our eyeballs to advertisers for a pittance, we won’t all be working for Mark Zuckerberg someday.- IHT

Facebook Inc (NASDAQ)

vs. Technology Services News

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Warning to Malaysian Internet Users: an Amendment to Evidence Act 2012

Onus on account owners as cyber bullies and stalkers often get away because of lack of evidence

PETALING JAYA: “It wasn't me.” That's the most common response from people when a hate or threatening message is traced to their Facebook or Twitter or any other Internet account.

The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission says it is almost legally impossible to take action if all that a person has to do is to deny any responsibility.

“Think of the victims. People who have been slandered or whose lives have been threatened,” commission chairman Datuk Mohamed Sharil Mohamed Tarmizi said, adding that many a time cyber bullies and stalkers who often use “the cloak of anonymity” have got away because of lack of evidence.

“As more of the young are connected online, who is going to watch over these kids when there are real people who want to harm them?” he said in an interview on the amendment to the Evidence Act passed by the Dewan Rakyat last month.

Answering critics who said the amendment was unfair in pushing the burden of proof to the accused, he said that owners of Internet accounts where hate messages had originated could easily rebut charges against them if they were innocent.

“For example, if you can produce witnesses to say that you were nowhere near your computer or any other communicating device at the time the message was sent out, you can get off,” Sharil said.

He added: “It is not easy nailing offenders to the charge. Sometimes you can find evidence and sometimes you can't.

“At least now (with the amendment), a flat denial (from the accused) cannot work anymore.”

The amendment to Section 114(a) of the Evidence Act includes the following stipulations:

> If your name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting yourself as the author, you are deemed to have published the content.

> If a posting comes from your Internet or phone account, you are deemed to be the publisher unless the contrary is proved.

> If you have the control or custody of any computer which published any material, you are presumed to be the publisher unless proven otherwise.

Asked if the amendment infringed on Internet users' personal liberties, Sharil said the authorities would still have to carry out rigorous and thorough investigations before charging anyone.

“Then there is the trial processs to go through,” he added.

He admitted that the conviction rate of suspected cyber offenders was very low.

From 2009 to 2011, 625 cases of people making obscene or offensive comments via the Internet or phone were investigated.

Only 16 were brought to court and just three were convicted.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said it was difficult to prosecute offenders before the amendment to the Act.

“It was especially difficult to prosecute offenders because the servers were located overseas.

“Everything was in a mess,” he said, and denied that the amendment was to curb dissent.

“The Government does not want to stifle anyone. But we don't want people to slander or threaten others,” Nazri added.

By REGINA LEE regina@thestar.com.my

Amendment not justified, say groups

PETALING JAYA: The amendment to the Evidence Act transfers the burden of proof to the accused, which is contrary to the principle of justice, said lawyers and Internet users.

“At any trial, whether criminal or civil cases, it is up to the prosecutor to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Now the burden will be shifted to the accused to disprove (the allegation against them),” said human rights lawyer Edmund Bon.

He added: “All around the world where there is Internet any reasonable person would be against the posting of hate messages. But whether the Government should step in and take such control is another matter.”

Disputing that the amendment will bring more people to justice, Bon said that it will instead reduce the need for the police and other enforcement agencies to be thorough in their investigations.

He believed that current defamation and sedition laws were enough to curb offensive and criminal messages on the Internet.

Intellectual property lawyer and Kuala Lumpur Bar Information Technology Committee co-chairman Foong Cheng Leong said the amendment would be a source of harassment to people whose identities have been abused to send offensive or threatening messages.

“Say it is an elderly person who subscribes to the Internet and does not know how to secure his wifi account.

“If someone uses that unsecured wifi to upload all these offensive postings, it's the elderly man who will get into trouble,” he said.

However, he agreed that it was difficult to trace the author of the offensive material, especially when international servers or public computers are used.

“But changing the law is taking the easy way out,” said Foong, who authored an extensive article about the amendment on the Loyar Burok website. ( See below:Grave repercussions for internet users)

Meanwhile, many have tweeted their disapproval for the amendment, claiming that people would have to “flip over backwards to prove their innocence”.

At the same time, some have voiced their support for the amendment, especially those who have been on the receiving end of hate messages.

“These anonymous writers of hate messages against me are gutless and stupid.

“They help justify the Government's proposal to amend the Evidence Act,” tweeted lawyer Roger Tan who had been criticised for writing a critique on the recent Malaysian Bar extraordinary general meeting.

Grave repercussions for internet users

The Evidence (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2012 was one of the bills rushed and passed by the Parliament recently. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz, when winding up the Evidence (Amendment) Bill 2012, said the use of pseudonyms or anonymity by any party to do cyber crimes had made it difficult for the action to be taken against them. Hence, the Evidence Act 1950 must be amended to address the issue of Internet anonymity.

The amendments introduced s. 114A into the Evidence Act 1950 to provide for the presumption of fact in publication in order to facilitate the identification and proving of the identity of an anonymous person involved in publication through the internet. In simple words, s. 114A introduces 3 circumstances where an Internet user is deemed to be a publisher of a content unless proven otherwise by him or her.

Men in masks, beware of s.114A.

Although it is stated that the amendment is to cover anonymous persons on the internet, the effect of the amendment is quite wide. You see, we, especially social media network users, generally do not use our real names on the Internet. We use nicknames and pseudonyms. Our home addresses do not appear on our account. We sometimes use fictional characters or even digitalized images of ourselves as our profile picture. All these are done to protect our own privacy. So, if none of my personal details appear on my account, does this mean I am anonymous? If someone’s identity cannot be directly ascertained from his account, I would think that he would be anonymous.

The new s. 114A(1) states that “A person whose name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting himself as the owner, host , administrator, editor or sub-editor, or who in any manner facilitates to publish or re-publish the publication is presumed to have published or re-published the contents of the publication unless the contrary is proved”. In simple words, if your name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting yourself as the aforesaid persons, you are deemed to have published the content. So, for example, if someone creates a blog with your name, you are deemed to have published the articles there unless you prove otherwise. If you have a blog and someone posts a comment, you are deemed to have published it. If you have a Facebook page and an user posts something on your wall, you are deemed to have published it!<.

Subsection (2) provides a graver consequence. If a posting originates from your account with a network service provider, you are deemed to be the publisher unless the contrary is proved. In simple terms, if a posting originates from your TM Unifi account, you are deemed to be the publisher. In the following scenarios, you are deemed to be the publisher unless you prove the contrary:-.

(1) You have a home network with a few house mates sharing one internet account. You are deemed to be the publisher even though one of your house mates posts something offensive online..

(2) You have wireless network at home but you did not secure your network. You are deemed to be the publisher even though someone “piggybacks” your network to post something offensive..

(3) You have a party at home and allows your friends to access your PC or wireless network.You are deemed to be the publisher even though it was a friend who posted something offensive..

(4) Someone use your phone or tablet to post something offensive. You are deemed to be the publisher..

As for subsection (3), you are presumed to have published a content if you have custory or control of any computer which the publication originates from. Here, you are deemed to be the publisher so long your computer was the device that had posted the content. So if someone “tweetjacks” you or naughtily updates your Facebook with something offensive, you are deemed to be the publisher unless you prove otherwise Admittedly, the amendments certainly saves a lot of the investigator’s time. It is very difficult to trace someone on the Internet. It will make prosecution for, among others, defamation, offences under the Communication and Multimedia Act 1998 and Computer Crimes Act 1997 and, election offences much easier. But it is not impossible to trace someone. There are many cases where perpetrators are caught and charged..

The new Bill: to like or not to like? | Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/birgerking/

I do not see the logic to deem someone to be a publisher. If an investigator is unable to trace the anonymous internet user, then why should the innocent Internet user take the rap? The onus of proof should always be on the prosecuting side. In the English case of Applause Store Productions Limited & Anor v Grant Raphael [2008] EWHC 1781 (QB), the claimants were awarded £22,000 in damages against Raphael, an old school friend, who had created a false personal profile of the claimants on Facebook. The claimants convinced the Court that Raphael was the person who created the fake profile even though he claimed that he had a party at his house and someone in that party created the account.

In summary, the new amendments force an innocent party to show that he is not the publisher. Victims of stolen identity or hacking would have a lot more problems to fix. Since computers can be easily manipulated and identity theft is quite rampant, it is dangerous to put the onus on internet users. An internet user will need to give an alibi that it wasn’t him. He needs to prove that he has no access to the computer at that time of publication and he needs to produce call witnesses to support his alibi..

Clearly, it is against our very fundamental principal of “innocent until proven guilty”. With general election looming, I fear this amendment will be used oppressively. Fortunately, the amendment is not in force yet. I strongly hope that the government will relook into this amendment.

Posted by Foong Cheng Leong

U.S. designs on South China Sea exposed!

BEIJING, May 25 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Senator John Kerry's recent statement on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has exposed the country's selfish intentions for the South China Sea, an area where the United States has no claims to sovereignty and is not a party in disputes there.

Kerry, chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, said during a hearing on the convention held Wednesday that China and other countries are "staking out illegal claims in the South China Sea and elsewhere."

He added that becoming a party to the treaty would provide an immediate boost to U.S. credibility "as we push back against excessive maritime claims and illegal restrictions on our warships or commercial vessels."

As the United States turns its national security focus toward the Asia-Pacific region, its willingness to join the convention is a means to find a legal framework for the country to interfere with issues in the South China Sea and elsewhere, as well as maximize its strategic interests in political, economic and military fields around the world.

The U.S. is the only major nation that has refused to sign the treaty, which has been endorsed by 160 countries and the European Union.

The hearing was the first one on the treaty in four years, and the Obama administration and the U.S. Armed Forces are now pushing Congress to sign it.

The reason why the U.S. once refused to sign the treaty is that the treaty's provisions will limit the free navigational rights of U.S. warships in other countries' exclusive economic zones.

However, the U.S. attitude toward the convention is now changing.

Dr. Zhang Haiwen, deputy director of the China Institute for Marine Affairs under the State Oceanic Administration, said the U.S. has realized the disadvantages of not signing the convention, which have impaired its role as a leader in global maritime issues.

Kerry said at the hearing that ratifying the treaty will lock down the favorable navigational rights that the U.S. military and shipping interests depend on every single day. It will also strengthen the country's hand against China and others who "stake out claims" in the Pacific, the Arctic or elsewhere.

The treaty will also help U.S. companies' oil and gas investments secure the country's energy future as well as help secure access to rare earth minerals, which the country needs for weapons systems, computers and cell phones, among other products, Kerry added.

Kerry also said that China and other countries are "staking out illegal claims in the South China Sea and elsewhere." However, the truth is that he thought disputes in the South China Sea have affected U.S. companies' rights to gain oil and gas resources in the region and the free navigational rights of its vessels.

Zhang said the convention is the fruit of over a decade of international negotiations and the product of the balance of different interests. It provides fundamental and principled provisions for maritime activities for the whole of mankind.

"But the convention itself cannot solve territorial disputes," said Zhang.

She said China's territorial claims over some islands and shoals in the South China Sea have sufficient historical evidence and legal bases, and have been recognized by the international community over a long period of time.

It is dangerous that some U.S. politicians are expanding U.S. claims and raising its degree of interference. This will aggravate regional tensions and is not conducive to resolving issues.

Related posts/articles/news:

Who owns the South China Sea islets in the eyes of the world?

China's warns US of Confrontation over South China Sea

United we stand, divided we fall in South China Sea?

China to handle S China Sea disputes through direct negotiations
BEIJING, May 25 (Xinhua) -- A Foreign Ministry spokesman said Friday that China will negotiate directly with relevant parties in regards to resolving disputes in the South China Sea.
"China has long been committed to safeguarding peace and stability by consulting with ASEAN nations and signing agreements, such as the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said. Full story

Video: China opposes third party involvement in Huangyan Island dispute

•	U.S. top diplomatic, military officials urge Senate to ratify UN sea convention

•	U.S. defense chief urges Congress to ratify UN Sea Convention

•	China to handle S China Sea disputes through direct negotiations

•	China strengthens control in Huangyan Island waters

•	China opposes third party involvement in Huangyan Island dispute

China issues 2011 US human rights record

US human rights report is full of distortion & false accusations

China has hit back at the US State Department’s controversial annual human rights report, saying it is full of distortion and false accusations. China says the US should stop pointing its finger at human rights situations in other countries and regions, a notorious practice of interfering in their internal affairs. In a further response, China has released its own report into the US’s Human Rights Record last year.

Play Video

China’s report says the US is again pointing a finger at the human rights situation in nearly 200 countries and regions, including China. However, the US turns a blind eye to its own terrible rights situation and seldom mentions it in its controversial annual report. China’s report urges the US to face up to its own human rights violations.

China’s report says the United States has real strength in human, financial and material resources to exert effective control over violent crimes. However, its society suffers chronically from such crimes, and its people’s lives, properties and personal security lack proper protection. The US also has a high incidence of gun related crime.

The report says the violation of people’s civil and political rights by the government is severe. US citizens’ rights and freedom were seriously violated during the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, with tens of thousands of protesters arrested. While advocating media and Internet freedom, the US in fact imposes fairly strict restrictions on the media and cyberspace. The US regards itself as the "beacon of democracy". However, its democracy is largely based on money.

China’s report says the US is the world’s richest country, but Americans’ economic, social and cultural rights are going from bad to worse. Unemployment remains high and the gap between the rich and the poor is continuing to widen. It also notes the number of people classed as poor in the US has hit a record high. More than 46 million Americans were in poverty in 2010, 2.6 million more than a year earlier. The number of American people without health insurance has increased progressively each year.

The report also says racial discrimination is deep-seated in the US. Minority groups regularly confront discrimination at work. They also face inequality in education. Racial discrimination is evident in law enforcement and judicial systems, racial hate crimes are frequent, and immigrants’ rights and interests are not guaranteed.

The rights of women and children rights are suffering. Gender discrimination against women exists widely in the US, and women in the country often experience sexual assault and violence. The report also says many children in the US live in poverty. Violence against children is severe.

The report points out the US has a notorious record of international human rights violations, imposing illegal medical tests on people in other countries. The US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused large numbers of civilian casualties. The report also says the US continues to violate the living and development rights of Cubans.

The report says the US has taken human rights as a political instrument to defame other nations in its own strategic interest. While illustrating a dismal record of the US on its own human rights, China’s report says the US is not justified in posing as the world’s fighter for human justice. It uses double standards in evaluating human rights conditions in other countries. China reiterates its stance of opposing foreign intervention in its internal affairs under the pretext of human rights.

Saturday, May 26, 2012

ChinaCache, TM in strategic partnership

KUALA LUMPUR: ChinaCache International Holdings Ltd and Telekom Malaysia Bhd (TM) have established a strategic partnership in a joint effort to provide Chinese content localisation in Malaysia.

The partnership will improve the accessibility of Chinese content for Malaysian Internet users, where ChinaCache will provide the technology to localise Chinese content in Malaysia which will enhance users’ experience and reduce costs for carriers.

“The localisation technology will allow content to be stored in, and served, via the caches deployed in Malaysia before reaching the end customers through TM’s network,” it said in a joint statement.

ChinaCache is a leading provider of content delivery network services in China.

ChinaCache’s North American branch general manager Joe Zhu said the strong social media presence in Malaysia had accounted for growing interest in Chinese content and ChinaCache was committed to the goal of making that content easily accessible internationally.

“TM is indeed very pleased with this collaboration with ChinaCache.

“Malaysians, especially TM’s customers, will not only be able to enjoy excellent Chinese content but also enjoy enhanced surfing experience as the source of content is stored locally here, which will result in seamless network performance.

“This new collaborative effort between both companies will definitely help cement the value of Malaysia as an important content hub in this region, complementing Malaysia’s existing sound Internet infrastructure,” TM Global executive vice president Rozaimy Abd Rahman said. - The Star

15 Ways to Accelerate Your PC’s Slowest Component: You!

CREDIT: Laptopmag.com

View full size image

There's nothing more soul-sucking than sitting there picking your earwax while you watch Windows 7's blue ring of fire. Yet, to be fair, your poor laptop spends a lot more time waiting for you to act than you waste watching it load applications, boot up or finish processing. If your computer takes .8 seconds to load your browser, but you take 5 unnecessary seconds to type in a username and password, who's the slow poke?

Fortunately, you can reduce the human bottleneck if you take just a few simple steps that will double your personal processing power. To show the benefits of overclocking yourself, I've put my stop watch where my mouth is and recorded the amount of time you'll save by following each of my tips. Sure, you may only save a few seconds by using a particular shortcut, but those moments really add up, particularly when you're performing scores of similar actions every hour.

Follow these time-saving tricks to keep your computer from sitting around and twiddling its fans when it should be turbo boosting to keep up with you:

1. Assign Keyboard Shortcuts to Favorite Apps

Any time you have to roll your mouse pointer across the screen, you're wasting precious milliseconds of your life that you'll never have again. Just imagine that your pointer is sitting in the upper right corner of the screen and you have to roll it all the way over to the Start button, click to open the menu and then navigate your way through the folders, just to find and launch PowerPoint. That's 5.46 wasted seconds, according to our estimates.

However, if you assign a keyboard shortcut to the application, you can launch it in under .5 seconds, the amount of time it takes to hit a combo like CTRL + ALT + C. To assign a hot key to an application, simply right click on its shortcut icon, select properties, click the shortcut tab, and then enter some combination of CTRL + ALT + (Letter or Number) into the Shortcut key box. To make remembering them easy, I recommend using letters that match the name of the software you want to load. For example, assign CTRL + ALT + W to Microsoft Word.

Time saved: 5 seconds per app open
[5 Things to Look for in Your Next Notebook Keyboard]

2. Use Macros to Enter Frequently-typed Text

If you have something you type frequently such as "Dear PR crony, For the 100th time, I'm a tech journalist. I don't cover the Oak Ridge Boys. Now please go away," you can accomplish that with just one key stroke rather than 17 seconds of touch typing. Even if you're just entering your email address, you'll save a good 3 seconds.

A number of programs allow you to assign text to hot keys, but Quick Paste is my favorite, because it's totally free and very easy to use. After downloading Quick Paste, be sure to select "Start with Windows" from the #Options menu and "Minimize to tray if Close" so that it will always run in the background.
Time Saved: 17 seconds more or less.

3. Employ a Password Manager to Log in for You

There are few bigger time sucks than remembering dozens of different username / password combos and typing them in every time you need to log in to your email client, social media service, favorite shopping site or bank account. And while you could use the same simple set of credentials everywhere, that leaves you wide open to hacking and identity theft.

The fastest and most secure way to type in your login credentials is with a password manager like the totally-free and popular KeePass. With this utility, you can keep all your credentials in a single encrypted key file and then set the program to type them into any form, online or offline, when you hit a key like CTRL + ALT + A. A number of KeePass plugins allow you to keep your password file synced across multiple computers and to integrate it with your browser for even faster web logins.

Time Saved: 4 Seconds to 5 Minutes per login, depending on your long-term memory.
[Lock Down Your Log-in: 6 Password Managers to Protect Your Accounts]

4. Get Social Networking and Email Notifications Without Loading a Single Web Page

If you're like me, you need to know right away when someone references you on a social network and you need to know about every email the second it arrives. However, you waste precious moments every time you navigate to your accounts just to see if you've gotten anything new.

I recommend installing some browser extensions that will alert you the instant you get a new message, even if you don't have the web page for that service open. Though you can get some plug-ins for Firefox and IE that provide some alerts, Chrome Browser puts your alert icons in the most prominent place, right next to its address bar.

For Chrome, I recommend the following extensions:

Facebook Notifications
Google+ Notifications
OWA Chrome Companion (for Exchange email)
Google Mail Notifier
Twitter Notifier

Time Saved: 30 seconds every 5 to 10 minutes (or however often you would have been irresistibly compelled to check your accounts).
[Facebook vs. Google +: Which Social Network is Best?]

5. Use Dual Monitors and Aero Snap to View Several Windows at Once

Most of us need several windows open at once to do our work. If you're writing a report in Word and need to glance at the assignment your boss sent via email, check the results of a calculation in Exel, and grab some additional data from a website, you'll have at least four windows you really need to look at. If you can only fit one of these windows on the screen at a time, you'll spend an eternity switching between them. Pivoting your eye balls from one side of the desktop to another is infinitely faster than moving your pointer or hitting a key.

To save time, try putting more windows next to each other on-screen. Hit Window Key + Left on one window and Window Key + Right on another to snap two applications right next to each other. Add a second monitor to give you more windows on the screen at once or two windows running at full screen. The Lenovo ThinkVision LT1421 portable monitor is a great second screen for laptop users on the go, because it weighs less than 3 pounds and is powered by USB.

Time Saved: 1.5 to 2 seconds per window switch, which adds up to several minutes per hour.

6. Learn How to Touch Type Faster

If you can't type without looking at the keyboard and using all 10 fingers, you need to learn touch typing. Every time you sit there pecking at the keys, your computer is secretly laughing at you and texting all its friends on the network to tell them what kind of noob it has caressing its keys.

Fortunately, many online programs can help you learn how to touch type or improve your touch typing to where it should be, 80 or more words per minute. TypingWeb provides some good, free typing lessons, but I really like the paid service at Ten Thumbs Typing Tutor which costs $25.95.

Time Saved: Enter text 300 percent faster or more.

7. Search the Web Directly from Your Browser Address Bar

If you need to perform a web search there is absolutely no reason to waste time by navigating to Google.com or Bing.com and then typing your query into the search box. Instead, all the modern browsers will query your search engine of choice if you just type the text you're looking for right into the address bar.

In a test, we found that navigating to Google.com, waiting for the page to load, typing in the search term "laptops," hitting enter and waiting for the results took 9 seconds while simply typing "laptops" into the Chrome address bar, hitting Enter and waiting for results took 4 seconds.

Time Saved: 5 seconds per query
[Web Browser Tips and Apps to Save You Time]

8. Find Stuff Faster Using the Start Menu Search Box.

When you need to find a file or program, there's no reason to go fumbling through dozens of folders like some kind of Watergate burglar. It's not necessary to launch a dedicated explorer window either. Simply hit the Windows key or CTRL + Esc to pop-up the start menu and start typing into the "Search for programs or files" box.

You may need to only type the first few letters of a file name before Windows starts making suggestions for you. This instant search feature is particularly useful when you know exactly what you're looking for. For example, when I wanted to find a document I had written about SSDs, I typed "SSD" into the start menu and had my results in 3 seconds. When I browsed the documents folder to find the same file, it took 6 seconds.

Time Saved: 3 seconds

9. Configure Your File Associations to Open Documents with the Program You Want

Unless you just bought your computer yesterday, you probably have at least five different programs that can open JPEGs, four programs that can play MP3s, two that can display PDFs and six that can edit TXT files. Unfortunately, the default program which launches when you double click on a file isn't necessarily the one you need.For example, if you want to crop a picture and remove red eye from it, you'll need to open the JPEG in Photoshop, not Windows Gallery.

To change file associations in Windows, type the term "file type" into the Start menu search box and then select "Make a file type always open in a specific program." Then select the file extension you wish to change (ex: .jpg) and click the Change program button. Finally, you'll need to pick the program you want to open with and click Ok.

Time Saved: 10 seconds

10. Avoid the Scroll Bar

Every time you roll your mouse pointer over to the scroll bar on the right side of a window and use it to move down the page, you've wasting time, a lot of it. If you have a mouse, the answer is obvious: use the scroll wheel to slide down your documents, emails and web pages. However, if you don't have a mouse, use two finger scrolling on your touchpad; just place your index and middle finger next to each other and drag them down the pad. Pointing sticks like Lenovo's TrackPoint provide dedicated scroll buttons as well.

In web browsers, hitting the spacebar key is even faste, as a single tap takes you down exactly one screen. In my tests, using the scroll bar to navigate down to the "display" section of a smartphone review took 4 seconds, using the mouse scroll wheel took 2 seconds, and hitting the space bar to jump down two screens took just 1 second.

Time Saved: 2 to 3 seconds

11. Learn Windows' Keyboard Shortcuts

I've explained already explained how you can assign keyboard macros to commonly typed text or to opening programs, but it's equally important to memorize Windows' own built-in hot keys. Every time you use one of the following key combinations, you save precious seconds you'd otherwise spend rolling the pointer across the screen until you found these options on various menus and sub-menus.

ALT + F4: Close the current window [save 1.3 seconds]
Windows Key or CTRL + ESC: Open start menu [ save 1 second]
F5 or CTRL + R: Refresh web page [ save 1 second]
CTRL + F: Find within document [save 3 seconds]
CTRL + D: Bookmark this page (in browsers) [save 1.5 seconds]
CTRL + Left or Right Arrow: Jump forward or back one word [save 2 seconds]
CTRL + Up or Down: Jump up or down a paragraph (only works in some programs) [save 1.5 seconds]
CTRL + A: Select All [save 2 seconds per full page of text, save 17 seconds on an 8 page document]
CTRL + Shift + Arrow Key: Select Text [save .5 seconds over scrolling, but be more accurate]
F2: Rename file (used primarily when browsing folders) [save 2 seconds]
CTRL + S: Save (hit this instinctively every few seconds when working on documents) [save 1.4 seconds]
CTRL + Z / CTRL + Y: Undo / Redo [save 1.5 seconds]
CTRL + C / CTRL + X / CTRL + V: Copy / Cut / Paste (but you knew that already, right?) [save 1.5 seconds]

12. Increase the Number of Google/Bing Results Per Page

When you conduct a web search on Google or Bing, you see just the first 10 results by default. If you don't see the exact result you want on the first page you have to click again and again to see the second, third or fourth page of results. All that clicking and loading takes time, approximately 3.6 seconds per extra page of results you visit.

Fortunately, you can configure the two major search engines to show you more than 10 results on a page, allowing you to scroll through more results without clicking on a next button and waiting for another page to load.

To change the number of results in Google:

Select Search Settings from the gear menu in the upper right corner of the screen.
Set Google Instant Predictions to "Never"
Slide the Results per Page bar to 50 or 100. I find that 50 provides the best balance between speed and selection.
Click Save.

To change the number of results in Bing:

Click the gear icon in the upper right corner of the screen.
Click the Web button in the left column.
Select 50 from the Results dropdown.
Click save.

Time Saved: 3.6 seconds per search result page.

13. Set Your Taskbar to "Never Combine" Icons

By default, Windows 7 takes all the open windows from a particular program and combines them into a single taskbar icon. While this may provide a neater looking taskbar, it saps precious seconds of your life away every time you have to hover over an icon to change windows.

For example, I had six Word documents open and wanted to select the one labeled "Smartphone Buyer's Guide." When I had to hover over the single Word icon to look for that document, it took me 2.5 seconds to locate the document and click it. When the document had its own button on the task bar, it took me just 1.5 seconds to select it.

To stop Windows 7 from combining all of a program's windows into one taskbar icon:

Right click on the Start button and select Properties
Select the Taskbar tab.
Select Never Combine from the Taskbar buttons menu.
Click Ok.

Time Savings: 1 second

14. Configure Autoplay for External Storage

When you first plug in a new USB flash drive, hard drive, smartphone, MP3 player or other USB device with storage, by default you are hit with Windows 7's Autorun menu, which gives you a slew of choices that range from "viewing" the content to editing it.

However, most of the time, what you want is to see a view of all the files and then decide whether to copy them, open them or add to them with other files you drag over. Selecting the Autoplay window and then choosing the "Open folder to view files" option took me a mind-bending 3.5 seconds, enough time to observe millions of particle collisions in CERN.

Fortunately, you don't need to be prompted every time you pop in a new storage device. Here's how to configure Autoplay so it automatically opens all your drives in folder view:

Type "Autoplay" into the Start Menu search box.
Click Autoplay.
Select Open folder to view files using Windows Explorer for Pictures, Video Files, Audio Files and Mixed content. You may also want to select that option for specific devices that may appear on your list like your camera or phone.

Time Saved: 3.5 seconds

15. Don't Put Your Laptop to Sleep when You Close the Lid

Every notebook user has had this experience. Your notebook is sitting open on your lap, you need to reach into your bag that's on the ground and you're in a tight space so you close the lid to prevent the notebook from falling over as you bend. The notebook lid is only closed for a couple of seconds, but when you open it again, you have to wait a while for the system to wake. If your system has password protection, it may even prompt you to enter your password when you lift the lid.

Even if you're traveling down the hallway at work for a full two minutes, it doesn't pay to put your laptop to sleep. You want to keep your notebook safe by closing the lid before you carry it, but you don't want to waste time logging back in. The easiest way to avoid this whole sleep/wake problem is to configure your notebook not to sleep on lid close.

To stop your PC laptop from sleeping on lid close:

Type "Lid" into the Start Menu search box.
Click "Change what closing the lid does"
Select Do nothing under On battery and Plugged in.
Click Save Changes

After making this change you can still put your notebook to sleep. You'll just need to press the power button or use the sleep option on the Start Menu.

Time Saved:10 to 15 seconds (a lot more if you wake the notebook before it has gone to sleep)
This story was provided by Laptopmag.com, a sister site to LiveScience.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Malaysians should take heed of the highly priced IPO!

Malaysians should take heed that IPOs don’t always make money as the Facebook fiasco has amply demonstrated.

IF you think an initial public offering (IPO) is a sure way of making money, think again – things can go seriously wrong and companies can open a lot lower than their IPO price.

If anyone has delusions about an IPO automatically making money for those fortunate enough to have obtained the shares at that stage, the recent episode with Facebook should dispel any such notion.
Barely a week into trading, Facebook is trading at an 18% discount to its IPO price at the time of writing, hardly something that inspires confidence in IPOs in this current poor market.

Like me not: A Facebook Like Button logo is displayed on a window of a store in Palo Alto, California. Facebook and its underwriters came under legal attack as investors filed lawsuits over Facebook’s flop controversy-marred IPO and have accused the company of hiding material information from investors. If anyone has delusions about an IPO automatically making money, the recent episode with Facebook should dispel any such notion. — AFP

Facebook was offered at US$38 per share to raise US$16bil for the vendors that included founder Mark Zuckerberg, who became a cash billionaire after the deal and whose company was valued at US$104bil based on the IPO price.

And this for a company that had earnings of less than US$1bil and revenue of US$3.7bil, giving a historical price earnings ratio (market value divided by earnings) of over 100.

But still investment bankers felt they had a deal, secured the IPO investors and then listed the stock on May 17, only to see a steep fall from the very first day of trading, which eventually saw a cut in value of almost a fifth.

That’s amazing for a stock pushed by some of the top investment firms in the US including Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs and a company with such a strong brand recognition too.

Now disgruntled investors are crying foul and amidst reports of selective information given to some banks by Facebook, shareholders have started suing Facebook and Zuckerberg in an embarrassing development that threatens to overturn yet again how Wall Street does business.

The entire Facebook fiasco underlines one key important lesson – ignore fundamental valuation at your own risk. True, markets have their own madness and sometimes stocks trade way above what can be considered their intrinsic value.

But they don’t stay there for long if they ever do especially if the earnings stream does not start kicking in soon. And if there are any indications of problem, one can expect no less than a collapse in share prices if valuations were excessively high in the first place.

As the Facebook saga unfolds in the US, the applications closed yesterday for Gas Malaysia’s IPO here. Those who follow the situation here closely may realise that disclosure in IPOs, while it may seem better than before, need not necessarily be so.

Try as I might I could not find a forecast for earnings for Gas Malaysia in its prospectus, a company with a blue chip reputation owned by amongst others, an MMC Holdings-Shahpadu joint venture, Petronas Gas and Tokyo Gas-Mitsui. The Petronas name attached to it gives it a certain mystic and pedigree, no doubt.

But still I could not find forecast earnings per share or dividends for this year in the thick prospectus of over 300 pages. If it was in there – and I doubt that – should it not have been highlighted? And how does one value the company without such figures?

There was a time when every IPO had forecast earnings and dividends, sometimes for more than a year. That gave retail investors a good feel for the company they were buying but apparently that’s no more the requirement. In the light of the Facebook fiasco, that’s a retrograde step.

Whether it’s in the US or here, there is a clear need to tighten up IPO procedures and disclosures so that all investors have equal access to information and are not discriminated against. That helps in the creation of a fair, orderly and clean capital market, which people can generally rely upon.

In Gas Malaysia’s case, some analysts put the forward price earnings ratio at the issue price of RM2.20 a share at 18 times and the dividend yield at 4.4%. It is academic now since applications have closed but those don’t look particularly attractive.

At 18 times, the price earnings ratio is above that of many Malaysian blue chips. The dividend yield at 4.4% look respectable but is based on 100% of earnings being paid out as dividends, which makes it equivalent to the earnings yield and also implies very little or no future growth because nothing is being retained in the business for expansion.

In that context it looks less than attractive. But the Malaysian public, perceiving IPOs as a means to make money and attracted by Gas Malaysia’s affiliations, including that with national oil corporation Petronas, might think otherwise.

One hopes not, but if the valuations turn out to be expensive, then there could be nasty surprises. To reduce the possibility of that, regulatory authorities should probably revert to older, more stringent standards for IPOs which require profit and dividend forecasts to be clearly stated and verified, subject to the usual conditions, by the merchant bankers and accountants.

That will go some way to reassure investors, and especially retail investors who are the last to know things, that there is substance in the company that supports the issue price.

We certainly don’t want a Facebook-style fiasco in Malaysia.

A Question of Business By P. GUNASEGARAM starbiz@thestar.com.my

·Independent consultant and writer P Gunasegaram (t.p.guna@gmail.com) is not a fan of Facebook, the service or Facebook, the company.

Related posts:
Make money from Facebook IPO!
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg "Likes" Chan and ...
CEO to keep iron grip after IPO; how to make money ...
The Biggest Cost of Facebook's Growth
Facebook Seeks Political Ad Dollars
The Facebook Fallacy
Facebook, Zuckerberg & banks sued over IPO
US market ahead: major signs say 'sell', the Facebook effect
Facebook price falls !
Facebook Tumble, blame game begin !
Facebook market makers' losses total at least $100m; Share price should trade for $13.80!

Friday, May 25, 2012

Facebook market makers' losses total at least $100m; Share price should trade for $13.80!

NEW YORK (Reuters): Claims by four of Wall Street's main market makers against Nasdaq over Facebook's botched IPO are likely to exceed $100 million, as they and other traders continue to deal with thousands of problems with customer orders.

A technical glitch delayed the social networking company's market debut by 30 minutes on Friday and many client orders were delayed, giving some investors and traders significant losses as the stock price dropped. The exchange operator is facing lawsuits from investors and threats of legal action from brokers.

Four of the top market makers in the Facebook IPO -- Knight Capital, Citadel Securities, UBS AG and Citi's Automated Trading Desk -- collectively have probably lost more than $100 million from problems arising from the deal, said a senior executive at one of the firms.

Knight and Citadel are each claiming losses of $30 million to $35 million, potentially overwhelming a $13 million fund the exchange set up to deal with potential claims.

Nasdaq also has to contend with the outside prospect that it could lose the Facebook listing entirely after having just obtained it.

Facebook shares ended regular trading on Thursday up 3.2 percent at $33.03, about $5 short of their offering price. Action on the stock, however, has essentially become secondary to the fallout from the IPO -- its price, its size, its execution and questions about selective disclosure of its financial prospects.

Regulators including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin are now looking into how the IPO was handled. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is also reviewing the matter.

BROKERS UP IN ARMS

Advisers familiar with the situation said many investors are now finding out, nearly a week after the fact, that their orders were not executed at the prices they thought.

Fidelity, in a statement, said it was working with regulators and market makers on its clients' issues "and we will continue to do so until we are confident that Nasdaq has done everything it can to mitigate the impact to our customers."

Morgan Stanley is also still tending to trade orders placed by brokerage customers on Friday, two people familiar with the situation said. Nasdaq has said all orders were returned by 1:50 p.m. EDT last Friday, but a Morgan Stanley Smith Barney source said it did not get trade information in a "systemic, orderly way.

Late Thursday, the company held a call with its brokers and told them adjustments would be made to thousands of trades so that no limit orders would be filled at more than $43 a share for stock from the IPO day, a person familiar with the call said.

While brokerages may have received confirmation of trades made on Friday, many were still handling customer disputes over what price they received on the trades, officials said.

The question is "who is going to eat the cost" of compensating those investors, said Alan Haft, a financial adviser with California-based Kings Point Capital LLC, which has $200 million in assets.

One prominent plaintiffs lawyer said what happened with Facebook was reminiscent of the dot-com bubble.

"This is just another spin on the same game of unfair treatment of individual investors," said Stanley Bernstein of Bernstein Liebhard. He chaired the plaintiffs' committee in an IPO class-action suit challenging the role of investment banks in more than 300 IPOs between 1998 and 2000. The litigation ended in a $586 million settlement in favor of the plaintiffs.

MARKET MAKERS LOOM

The claims by market makers Knight and Citadel could end up dwarfing some of the brokerage issues, though.

"They are certainly facing the specter of some significant lawsuits if this pool is not enough," a source familiar with Knight's situation said of the Nasdaq claims pool.

Citadel has sent its losses to Nasdaq for potential compensation, a source familiar with the matter said. Citadel's hedge fund was not affected.

The head of trading at Instinet said it still had no idea when Nasdaq would respond to requests for accommodation -- essentially, compensation for the order problems -- or if those requests would be honored.

"Were gonna be looking at a loss on our books" if Nasdaq does not honor the requests, Mark Turner said. "We basically made most of our clients whole because Nasdaq told us to go through the process and file for accommodation. If Nasdaq does not accommodate us we're going to end up taking a loss."

"I don't know that I want to put a dollar amount on that but it's not nearly as significant as Knight's ($30-$35 million)," he said.

Citadel and Knight, as market makers to the Nasdaq, honor their clients' buy, sell and cancellation orders. The orders are supposed to be processed by the exchange within milliseconds, but there was a nearly two-hour delay in processing Facebook orders at the Nasdaq.

During that time, market makers had no idea where their orders stood. And in reality, the price clients bought or sold at was sometimes different than the price they actually got.

For example, Facebook shares began trading with an opening cross price - the first price at which those not in on the IPO could buy or sell - of $42 per share. If an order to sell 10,000 shares at $42 went in at that time, but wasn't filled until later in the day when shares were trading at around $39, a market maker like Citadel or Knight would make up the difference - in this case, at a cost of $30,000.

FEWER PROBLEMS ELSEWHERE

Several analysts who cover exchanges said Nasdaq's legal liability should be limited, though. According to the analysts, securities rules give Nasdaq wide discretion in determining what, if any, compensation it should pay to customers who claim that they suffered losses due to trading execution.

Under exchange rules, Nasdaq's liability regarding client losses from certain trading issues is limited to $3 million a month. Market makers will be arguing that Nasdaq was so grossly negligent that its actions during the IPO opening override the limits, said a source with knowledge of Knight's situation.

Other firms said they did not have similar problems to those of Knight, raising questions about the scope of the losses.

"The problems were where people were trying to cancel orders; we didn't have that," said Peter Boockvar, equity strategist at Miller Tabak & Co in New York. "Because we didn't have a problem doesn't mean there weren't problems."

E*Trade Financial Corp said its market making operations realized losses of "well under a million dollars."

Charles Schwab Corp had a "small number" of the "tens of thousands of clients" who traded Facebook whose issues still have not been resolved, a spokesman said. "Each one requires some analysis to resolve, which can be time consuming."

Shares of Nasdaq fell 1 cent to $21.80 on Thursday. As of Thursday's close the stock was down 5.2 percent from its last close before the Facebook debacle. Over the same period NYSE Euronext is down just 0.1 percent.

The slide in the shares is adding to the pressure on Nasdaq Chief Executive Robert Greifeld, who defended the exchange's performance at its annual meeting last Tuesday.

Facebook Inc (NASDAQ)

vs. Technology Services News

By Mark Hulbert, MarketWatch

May 25, 2012, 12:02 a.m.

Facebook’s stock should trade for $13.80
Commentary: Here’s a fair-price calculation for Facebook

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (MarketWatch) — Well, then, what should be the price of Facebook’s stock?

Rather than endlessly rehashing the events that have taken place over the last week, it is this question that investors should be asking. Surprisingly, however, few are doing so.

And yet, courtesy of a just-released study, calculating a fair price for Facebook’s stock isn’t as difficult as it might otherwise seem.

The study is entitled “Post-IPO Employment and Revenue Growth for U.S. IPOs, June 1996–2010.” Its authors are Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, and two researchers at the University of California, Davis: Martin Kenney, a professor in the Department of Human and Community Development, and Donald Patton, a research associate in that same department. ( Click here to read a copy of their study. )

The researchers found that the revenue of the average company going public between 1996 and 2010 grew by 212% over the five years after its IPO. Assuming Facebook’s revenue grows just as fast, and given that the company’s latest-year revenue was $3.71 billion, its annual revenue in five years’ time will be $11.58 billion.

Click to Play

NYSE, Nasdaq face off for Facebook

After the fumbled IPO for Facebook, the NYSE is renewing efforts to lure more stock listings away from its rival, Nasdaq, Photo: AFP/Getty Images.

Since Facebook FB +3.22% is most often compared to Google GOOG -0.95% , let’s assume that its price-to-sales ratio in five years will be just as high as Google’s is currently: 5.51-to-1. You could argue that this is an overly generous assumption, of course. But it nevertheless means Facebook’s market cap in five years will be just $63.8 billion — 30% less than where it stands today.

Assuming that the total number of its shares stays constant, that works out to a price per share of just $23.26 — in contrast to its recent closing price of $33.03.

Ouch.

Actually, however, the news is even worse: No one is going to invest in Facebook shares today if its price will be 30% lower in five years. So, in order to entice someone to invest in it today, Facebook needs to offer a handsome return. Assuming that its five-year return is equal to the stock market’s long-term average return of 11% annualized, Facebook shares currently would need to be trading at just $13.80.

Double ouch.

Don’t like that answer? Try focusing on earnings rather than sales, and you get only a marginally different result. Assuming its profit margin stays constant (instead of falling as it could very well do as it grows), assuming its P/E ratio in five years will be just as high as Google’s is today, and assuming that its stock will produce a five-year return of 11% annualized, Facebook’s stock today should be just $16.66.

How can Facebook investors wriggle out from underneath the awful picture these calculations paint? By assuming that its revenue and profitability will grow faster than the average IPO between 1996 and 2010 — and not just by a little bit, either, but a whole lot faster.

Of course, it’s always possible that Facebook will be able to pull that off.

But, as Professor Ritter pointed out to me earlier this week, “the bigger a company gets, the harder it is to maintain percentage growth.” And Facebook is already huge — larger, in fact, than all but 47 other publicly traded companies in the U.S.

So my back-of-the-envelope calculations for this column could very well be too optimistic rather than too pessimistic.

Given all this, Ritter said that a market cap “of $63 billion ... five years from now seems like a very reasonable scenario.”