Showing posts with label pixels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pixels. Show all posts

12 October 2007

Read All About It! - But Not in Newspaper

I'm making a promise to myself, and now to you, to reverse this trend. The future of journalism, not just newspapers, depends upon such loyalty. And now I pose this challenge to you: It is your duty as a journalist and a citizen to read the newspaper -- emphasis on paper, not pixels.

No, no, no, it's got to be clay tablets - I mean, why pick one particular modern instantiation? Let's at least go back to the origins of news.

And if you want to know why the suggestion that we all rush down the newsagents is simply a waste of time, try this, from the same misguided article:

I have no proof, but a strong feeling, that even journalists, especially young ones working at newspapers, don't read the paper. That feels wrong to me -- and self-defeating.

You don't think this could possibly be because they realise there are better ways of getting and conveying information these days? Just like more and more musicians realise that there are better ways of making a living from music than selling bits of plastic with little holes in them. (Via IP Democracy.)

15 January 2006

On Social Bookmarking, Spam - and Steganography

A fine analysis of the threats posed to social bookmarking sites (del.icio.us, digg.com etc) from Alex Bosworth. But for me, the real corker is his idea of steganographic spam.

Steganography involves hiding something in a message so that it is not even apparent there is hidden content - unlike cryptography, where the content is obscured but its presence is obvious. This might be achieved by hiding a message in the pixels of a picture - few enough for their presence not to be obvious to casual observers - that can be extracted using the appropriate software running the right algorithms.

Bosworth would have us imagine steganographic spam - so subtle, we are not even aware that it is there. Fiendish.