Whatever...

Pitchspace’s solution just exacerbates the problem

By Flora Haslam

This week’s Guardian tech podcast – aside from asking whether PR is needed anymore (something which I won’t go into here as it’s fairly obvious which side of the fence I’d sit) – introduces us to an interesting new concept: a matchmaking service that aims to put journalists in touch with stories without having to wade through mountains of irrelevant PR-generated fluff. 

Pitchspace is headed up by James Cox, who I might be inclined to trust a little more if he didn’t sound as though he’s never, ever worked in PR.  You really have to listen to his interview – classic comments include the idea that journalists will write your story if you send them a hamper from Harrods, that to start off in PR you need to invest in a database costing thousands of pounds, and that it’s all about product PR.

I’ve no doubt that journalists are faced with an incredibly irritating barrage of ill-targeted emails every day, only a tiny percentage of which are of any use.  But is a content aggregation service, where PRs post stuff and journalists search/RSS it, really going to make life that much easier?  I’ve also not heard many journalists say that what they’d really like are stories and pitches that have already been provided (in an identical format) to every other hack in Britain. 

Finally, is this really such a radical approach – Sourcewire, anyone? 

Yes, there are a lot of badly written releases and pitches out there, as well as some shamefully bad targeting – but I just can’t see how this system will improve things.  It’s certainly not going to make PRs write better materials and means that those who are new to the field are going to have even less idea about what individual journalists are interested in and care about.  Call me old-fashioned, but whatever happened to reading the publication or site you want to be in to find out who and what’s relevant?

I always thought that if you had a decent story that’s well-targeted and well-presented, then you’re sorted.  But then maybe I’m wrong. 

Quick trip to the Harrods website and rest of the day in the pub for me then...

Wi-Fi in the home is an open door for hackers

By Kathryn Mills-Webb

While stories about the ‘theft’ of Wi-Fi access occasionally surface in the press, most home wireless users are still not aware of the potential consequences of allowing neighbours free access to their Wi-Fi connection.  After all, most of us have probably accessed an unsecured wireless network at some point, and with monthly download limits now almost unbreakable for the average consumer, there seems little wrong with sharing the bandwidth.

However, if we carry on like this, more people could end up like the unfortunate Kenneth Haywood, a US expat in Mumbai questioned recently on charges of terrorism - someone had piggy-backed on his wireless network to send an email claiming responsibility for a bomb that killed more than 40 people. 

This isn’t just scaremongering.  As this example illustrates, vulnerable home Wi-Fi networks are increasingly the first port of call for hackers and various online ner-do-wells looking for an untraceable starting point to launch an attack from. 

While the above is an extreme case and one that most Wi-Fi users are unlikely to face, the implication is that all users should ensure their networks are properly secured and not open for any freeloader in the vicinity to use. 

While the Government and the EU seem keen to put an end to piracy and illegal file-sharing, they seem less keen to protect consumers from other activities that may be taking place in their name without their knowledge.  ISPs may rightly point out that all computer users are given the option of protecting their wireless network when they set it up – but there perhaps needs to be a bigger driver to educate subscribers as to why this is a good idea and what might result if they don’t.

Of course, a further issue is that the WEP encryption usually offered to consumers is considered to be weak protection against wireless hacking, and that we should be being encouraged to use the more secure WPA protocol... but that’s another story.

I robot, you Jane?

By Jacqui Depares

Stumbling through a copy of The Times last week, I was drawn to an article recounting Will Pavia’s date with Heart Robot.  Yes, that’s right. A robot.

Heart Robot was, until last week, the main attraction at The Science Museum and is an emotionally literate robot – meaning that he responds to movement and touch, and that his heart beat races should you grip his shoulder, as Will Pavia did. Shocking, given it was only their first date.

The publicity around Heart Robot coincided, quite aptly, with the launch of Disney Pixar’s hotly tipped WALL.E. Here we find ourselves following the tale of a robot called WALL.E who is designed to clean up earth in its polluted state.  WALL.E however falls in love with Eve, a fellow robot on another planet, and whilst I won’t spoil the ending for those of you who haven’t seen it yet, suffice it to say that Disney doesn’t disappoint.

So, what’s the relevancy of this? Well, if Heart Robot shows us anything, it’s that emotionally literate robots, like WALL.E (but perhaps without the Disney charm) – could soon be a reality for us.  Something, which whilst conceptually seems pretty cool, is nonetheless quite something to get our heads round.  And whilst I’d love to think that a future with robots would be more like having your own personal Johnny 5 from ‘Short Circuit’, the reality could in fact be like something from ‘The Terminator’ or Sonny in ‘I, Robot’ gone evil.

Delving into this a little bit further I had a quick search on the net to see what else I could discover on this topic. From a quick search it seems that 18 months ago there was even talk of creating a “code of ethics” for machines to protect them as they grow in sophistication.  Indeed, one professor at the time even asked the question “What happens if robots turn out to be sexy?”, whilst another – the acclaimed artificial intelligence expert David Levy – claimed that by 2050 robot lovers will be commonplace.

Now whilst this is a road I don’t think we should travel down for the purposes of this blog – the point it makes is clear. Robots could in the not too distant future become a part of everyday life.  So, next time you go to the cinema, or settle down on the sofa to watch yet another re-run of ‘I, Robot’, just think – the fiction could soon become a reality.

IT decision makers trust traditional media over blogs

By Mike King

Research carried out last month by Vanson Bourne, the specialist IT and telecoms research firm, gives some interesting insight into which information sources IT decision makers trust the most. 

The research, based on online interviews with 230 senior and middle IT managers in companies with more than 250 employees, found that on average, time is pretty evenly split between reading paper-based and online information sources. Unsurprisingly, over 90% of IT decision makers say they spend more time gathering information online than they did a couple of years ago.

What’s really interesting is that traditional IT publications are still seen as the most trusted source of information for keeping up to date with technology developments (by 81% of respondents), ahead of online only IT publications (66%), industry specific titles (66%) and the business media (65%).

At the other end of the scale, blogs (whether IT or industry sector focused and written by journalists or not) were seen as the least trustworthy source of information (rated as trustworthy by 25% or less of those surveyed) with only 16% making a point of following particular blogs.