Netscape.com says, “Hi to all Diggers!”

July 26th, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

Surprised? Well, read on…

Early this morning, someone submitted a story on Netscape.com. And Digg fans all over the world erupted in laughter and glee. Ever since the story was submitted, this is what appears, when Netscape is loaded into your browser:

The first is a four word expletive, and the second greets “all you Diggers out there!”

The culprit?

A story titled “Unbearable Cuteness”. Ironical,eh? Here’s the what and why of the entire fiasco.

Analysis:
A quick check of the JavaScript on the page reveals this script:

via a
title="http://www.cute.com">script>alert("fuck");
alert("Hi to all you Diggers out there ;)");script>"
href="http://www.cute.com">script>alert("fuck");
alert("Hi to all you Diggers out there ;)");script>"
onclick="trackOutbound(15475);">cute.com">script>alert("fuck");
alert("Hi to all you Diggers out there ;)");

The link that was submitted with the story exploited an XSS (Cross Site Scripting) vulnerability. PacketStorm had already published this vulnerability a month ago on the 6th of June. Apparently netscape.com does not sanitise its inputs before they are submitted. As a result, specially crafted JavaScript (like this one) can be used to send ‘malicious code’.

While Netscape is looking into the matter, Diggers across the globe are having a field day running multiple ‘Ha Ha! Netscape gets hacked!!‘ stories. Most of the l33t Diggers are already publishing their insightful comments on the stories, too.

What can I say? There is a child in all of us… :)

Technorati Tags: , , ,

powered by performancing firefox

‘GTraffic’ is here. Well, almost…

July 25th, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

I am pretty sure the guys at Google must be sneakily reading my blog. Remember this?
Google has rolled out a special version of Google Maps for your mobile phone (via Google Blog). Well, well, well…

So is it really true, then? Is Google silently creating a presence in all possible verticals? How long will it be before they integrate all things under one roof?

I am still wondering…

Technorati Tags: , ,

powered by performancing firefox

One World (Wide Web). One Identity?

July 21st, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

How many times have you had people sending you invitational eMails saying, “Try this cool site I found!” or “This is an amazing site!” or “You’ll absolutely love this one!” or lines to that effect?

Too many, I suspect.

Web 2.0 and the concept of User Generated Content has had the world in a tizzy for quite a while now. Innovative ideas and domain name registrations seem to go hand in hand. The people riding the waves of the Internet never had it so good. New services are introduced every day and competition is building up before you can say, “Watch out!”

As the Internet grows, as the flood of ideas increases, so will the number of identities. The number of services we use though, will continue to remain the same, maybe a few additions here and there.

Why? Because we are all loyalists to the core. We all have a list of our favorite sites that we visit regularly and we rarely visit the competition. There are innumerable excuses for this loyalty ranging from the old ‘comfort zone’, to the very latest ‘swanky look’, and the geeky ‘amazing feature-set.’

Truth is, we cannot handle multiple identities.

Having multiple identities is similar to owning two or more cell-phones. The greater the number of phones, the greater the interruption. Each cell-phone contributes an identity (in the vaguest sense of the word). Each eMail address is an identity that we have created for ourself on the WWW. Each profile on a social network is an identity that we maintain.

The number of eMails in your inbox is a fair indicator of the number of identities you have on the Web. And those of us, who are actively tracking the development of the collaborative Web, must have emails running into hundreds.

One idea would be to have a single secure identity that will cater to logins all across the internet. If such an idea were ever to gather support, it would have some interesting implications:

Naturally, this would imply a unique database to cater to all our identities across the web. But who should get the right to create and maintain such a database? The huge set of meta-data that would result would be a statistician’s dream come true! The flip-side of this is obviously the large ‘corporations’ that would give a few arms and legs (or even take a few) to get a crack at this data. (Ok, so I am a li’l partial to scientific research…)

What could be better than acquiring this data?

Having the data on your own servers! MyOpenID, Windows LiveID, Google Account Authentication, are a few names in this context. This probably explains why there is an intense competition between the Big Three and a few other key players.

If this sounds fairly Orwellian and reminds you of “1984” and Big Brother, you are probably right. :o)

The virtual world we live in, closely resembles the Orwellian 1984. Recent cases (Digg v/s Netscape, for instance) indicate as much. Search Engines indexing our content have the power to convey them to the faceless ‘Thought police.’ We have rich-sounding names like User Generated Content and Long Tail. And we have a faceless Big Brother who ‘purportedly’ keeps everything in check.

Makes you wonder: was Orwell right all along?

Technorati Tags: , , ,

powered by performancing firefox

Markets are *noisy* conversations.

June 27th, 2006 § 2 comments § permalink

Strange, isn’t it?

All of us hailed the coming of a shareable, collaborative web and ‘lovingly’ named it Web 2.0. But along with it came announcements and offerings, options and varieties; faster than anything else. So much, that the low murmur of the internet rose to a harsh, loud, incoherent noise. So much, that we are beginning to denounce it like no other.

Hypocrisy? Nope, I think “Familiarity breeds Contempt” is more like it…

Web 2.0 was a concept. Each one of us interpreted the concept and put forth ideas of their own. As a result, there was a rush of ideas and hence a flood of communication. People started ‘socializing’ on the web. Social networks boomed and people came ‘closer’.

IMHO, it all started with the advent of broadband connectivity. Being ‘always-on’ had a direct implication, that of being connected with all your near and dear ones. Web 2.0 looked upon the internet as one huge community, with local groups of people inhabiting it. This concept was publicized and then, taken too literally. Thus, were born the social networks of today.

The community is a market and markets have alternatives. Working on the same lines, social networks began to sprout, each claiming to offer something different from the other. But, the basic objective of these networks was the same – connecting people and conducting conversations across the globe.

The market analogy gives us yet another insight. Every product has competition. And every competitive product has a seller who is willing to canvass for it. The greater the competition, the larger the canvassing and the noisier the market. In the end the market become a large noisy mass of voices and nothing audible or coherent.

Get the drift?

The web as a marketplace has been inundated with offerings. The noise in the marketplace will remain until the day the sellers give up or the stocks dry up. Since, there is little chance of the latter happening, we will have to wait for the former to happen and pray that it happens sooner, rather than later.

The noise of the eMails and IMs that have been flying back and forth has overwhelmed us to the extent that we now want out. But without them, how would we communicate, let alone converse?

Or, are we wrong in assuming that eMails & IMs are the only methods of communication? What if there IS an alternative?

Will things be different?

Technorati Tags: , , ,

powered by performancing firefox

Google Doodles

June 15th, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

This post by Doug (a Xoogler) talks about how different people with different visions read differently into one and the same thing. Well, actually he talks about the Google-Dilbert Logo that *almost* caused quite an internal scandal in the Googleplex.

Those of you who have seen it, know what I am talking about. Those who haven’t, follow this link and read this.

Technorati Tags: Xoogler, ,

powered by performancing firefox

Crazy Little Thing called (Google) Love

June 7th, 2006 § 0 comments § permalink

People are lapping it up.

Google launched Spreadsheet on Tuesday and it was promptly covered. There’s a rumour about Picasa coming as a Web-based version soon. Anything Google releases is a matter of hot contention. It is not a question to ponder whether the interest in the product will be sustained or will die off the very next day itself. As long as it exists in the minds of the people, it will always bring in the hits.

You may call me a Google-basher, if you wish, but it still baffles me why Google should churn out these services at such a high rate. There are so many better things to do! Like, for example, they could actually be fine tuning their Search algorithm or re-inventing it.

Maybe they are already doing it and these things are simply to throw the hounds off the scent. Or maybe, they don’t have a clue where they should be headed now. Whichever it is, the big picture is really hard to see right now.

In the last year, since the advent of Gmail, AJAX and Web 2.0, Google has been building up a veritable repository of Apps, sorry, FREE apps for the *public*. What they did not create, they bought. And what they could not buy, they bought the competition and gave it away for free.

Again, the concept of Contextual Text-Ads worked fine, but then other players have now entered the Market and they are slowly eating up into the marketshare. Not that it is going to affect Google’s ‘economy’ much, but yet, it is something Google cannot ignore for long.

Let’s take a look at the facts:

  1. Google has built up a large user-base based on one single product – Search.
  2. Google has introduced various offerings into the Webosphere, definitely keeping up with the trends. Yet, there has been no visible innovation seen in the recent times.
  3. Every new Google product or offering has one result assured – Love it or hate it, you can’t ignore it.
  4. And lastly, each of the newer Google products is *loosely* integrated with the other ones.

Take a look at the last one again. There are no links from any of the Google apps to the others, save for the standard footer (which is ignored most of the time). Except for a few isolated examples (Maps and Calendar in Gmail) there have been very few instances of product integration. Why hasn’t Google integrated attachments with Writely and Google Video? Or with Google Base for that matter? Surely, it is not unimaginable? Why are they ignoring/neglecting/forgetting/overlooking/whatever such simple points? Or are they doing it deliberately?

One fine day, if they choose to bring all services (the old ones, the current and the new ones) under one umbrella, then this is what your typical day might look like:

7 AM. Wake up. Ready yourself for your daily work. Breakfast.
8 AM. Check Google Mail. Add client appointment(s) directly into Google Calendar. Check Google Traffic* for driving conditions and consult Google Maps for best route. Drive to Work.
9 AM. Reach Work. Open Gtalk. Your Calendar settings have been imported and all your appointments have been sent automatic reminder mails/notices about your meetings. Check your Gmail. Collaborate on Software Requirement Specifications and make changes with your colleague in Australia and save it immediately.
10 AM. Create a presentation for your Client meet using GPres* along with the same colleague in Australia. Simultaneously tabulate all the requisite data, draw up some quick formulae with the help of your colleague in Europe. Voila! Google Spreadsheet is ready with a cost estimate instantly!
11 PM. Client is online. (Need we mention free WiFi, here?) Hold a webmeeting with your client using Gtalk and conduct a video conference simultaneously. Close the deal and send a link to the already drawn up MoU and NDA along with the cost estimate that you just ruffled up with your colleague in Australia
1 PM. Open Google Search. Look for birthday Gifts for kids under ten years with a special interest in Pokemon. Find appropriate Gift. Pay using GMoney* and get it delivered instantly to your Office.
2 PM. Lunch Break
3 PM. Repeat steps 3 to 5
6 PM. Check your Gmail. Check for Google Calendar reminders/notices. Check Google Traffic* and Google Maps again. Drive home.

(*Coming Soon to a Browser near you. Please submit your eMail address for a special beta preview invite.)

The keen reader may observe that I have touched upon barely a few of the current offerings of Google. I have merely implied the potential what Google could capture with its current offerings. Whay are they holding back then? Is it to be a surprise attack, a Blitz-Krieg of some kind? If suddenly Google chooses to generate revenue out of all the (currently) free services

Google is building isolated chunk of applications. For us, they seem like unseemly, strange shapes. But they might well turn out to be smaller pieces of a mastermind Jigsaw puzzle. Google could well be on its way to building the only competition to, and yet not compete against Micro$oft.

Confused? Picture this: The Google WebOS and the Google Office.

The world is moving towards the virtual. Google might well stand to gain from this movement. At the same time as Google builds a monopoly on the Web, Microsoft keeps its monopoly on the Desktop. This might sound like a random conspiracy theory, but it is supported by hard facts.

Note that Google has not pushed any independent standards with any of its Applications. Writely supports .doc format as well as other formats. Spreadsheet claims “Familiar desktop feel” and that you can “Upload spreadsheets or worksheets from CSV or XLS format – all your formulas and formatting will come across intact.”

Wouldn’t a company seeking to remove M$ out of the competition promote other standards so that they could force the users out of the habit?

Consider this: Of late, there have not been any major innovations and releases in Google desktop paraphernelia. Those that are released have a distinct web connotation, for instance, GDS 4. In the other corner. M$ seems to have slowed down its work on the web front. Ray Ozzie and his Live clipboard are being handled by tech enthusiasts, who realize the implications of the tool. But the man himself, (Ray) seems to have faded somewhere into the horizon. The first impression of this is each of them is sticking to known battlegrounds.

And if they continue to do so, is it not a precursor of the things to follow? Is it really a random conspiracy theory, then?

Technorati Tags: , , ,

The Call – Part IV

May 10th, 2006 § 4 comments § permalink

The story so far:
The coicidences reveal themselves. Turns out he’s been talking to the grim reaper all this while. Struggling to get a hold on this revelation, he looks to clarify the situation. But it is difficult to hold a conversation, especially when you don’t know who you are talking to.And then there’s a knock on the door…

Sandy, his secretary, entered carrying a sheaf of papers, presumably more invoices for him to sign.She was engrossed in the papers. Silently, she approached his table, put the papers in front of him, and stood back and looked at him. And then, she noticed the little drops of perspiration on his fore-head.

“Is everything alright, sir? Are you ok?”

“Uhh, err.. no. I mean, yes, I am fine. Ummm… well… yeah, I am fine.”

He signed the papers and gave them back to her. It was an invoice for ordering some equipment. He flicked the thought away from his mind as soon as he registered it. Obviously, there were other more important things to think about.”

“Sandy, wait.” He called back after her. “You didn’t, by any chance, hear something strange outside, did you?”

She furrowed her brow in thought and replied slowly, “Now that you mention it, I think I heard something.”

“What? What did you hear?” He almost grabbed her. She was both bewildered and scared by his actions. He realized his foolishness and immediately let her go. Somewhat awkward and frightened, Sandy instinctively took a step back.

“I am… I am sorry.” He drew a long breath. “What was it that you heard?”

He had seen the expression of nervousness and panic beginning to set in on her face.

“Umm, well I thought I heard some noises in your room, and…” Sandy

“She’s right,” the voice again.

“Did you hear that?” he almost shouted to Sandy.

“Hear what?” Sandy asked, with a hint of apprehension and confusion in her voice which had already reached the tremolo point.

“C’mon, you think she can hear me? You know what, you gotta start believing in me by now.” the voice had a sadistic edge to it. It was as if the entity behind the voice was beginning to enjoy the beginning of an insanity. An insanity for which it was the cause.

“No… nothing. Forget it.”

“Are you sure? Do you want me to get you a doctor or something?” – Sandy again.

“No… no… it’s fine. I am fine…” he said.

“Sir, I think, I should – ”

“I SAID I AM FINE!! JUST LEAVE ME ALONE!!” This time he did shout.

Sandy looked at him in horror and with her slender little fingers on her mouth hastily stepped out. The office would start buzzing with the news in a short while now. But that was the least of his current concerns.

“Tch, tch. You shouldn’t have yelled at her like that. Poor thing. She’s all shaken up now. Look what you did to her…”

And then the walls in front of him dissolved into thin air and he saw a crowd outside, right in front of Sandy’s desk. She was sobbing and somebody passed he a Kleenex. She took the Kleenex and continued sobbing. One or two of the other employees, shot curious glances at his cabin door. The other women were trying to cajole her and console her. They tried, at the same time, to coax her to tell them what had happened.

And then the opacity of the walls returned and all was as before.

He groaned and made for his chair.

Technorati Tags: , ,

« Older Entries

Newer Entries »