blog.teekay.me

I’ve recently learned about Square: the latest startup of the Twitter-famed entrepreneur Jack Dorsey, and what he promises to be a revolutionary system for electronic payment.

The premise is simple: a wireless, cell-network based credit card reader - so simple it’s been done before, dozens of times; Apple already does this in their retail outlets, using modified iPhones and scanners to complete customer purchases from anywhere with WiFi, but Square is different, it revolutionises the payment processing of plastic by bringing the technology to everyone through a small plastic reader.

Square itself is a small attachment to any device with a 3.5mm audio input, that’s your iPhone, iPod touch, Zune HD, Windows Mobile, Android or even a laptop. The Square software then decrypts the audio back to a number and sets up the transaction. A quick signature from the payee on a touchscreen interface and you’re away. Square is s hosted service too, so the moment a transaction is completed a receipt is available online and confirmation sent by email or SMS. This transaction recording also allows companies to be informed when a repeat customer buys their tenth coffee: no more paper loyalty cards to be punched.

It’s simple to see now how Square is a technology full of potential: from coffeehouses to craftsmen to craigslisters, Square allows credit card transactions with existing hardware, no payment gateways, anywhere with a 3G signal. So when will Square reach you? “We’re trying to get the cost down significantly and just give them away”, says Dorsey in an interview of CNBC, “We’re aiming [a rollout] for March”. Dorsey wants to see one of these plastic squares in the pocket of every American. Some have criticised the operation, saying that Dorsey has developed technology with no use: with Japan already moving to a cashless economy using mobile phones as payment devices - but a cashless society is fragile with frightening Orwellian allusions, people like to be able to access their money in physical form, it makes them feel safe.

But there are of course downsides: Square is going to face the same if not higher levels of fraud as other gateways and will have to put up contingency funding; in it’s current state, Square cannot be used in the UK and other countries with the EMV standard for credit-security as it just scans the magnetic strip which doesn’t hold the encrypted PIN - it is effectively extending the use of a fundamentally insecure system. Square have also, so far, only invested in the iPhone, and although they promise to roll this out to as many devices as possible, it makes you wonder if the service will always be biased towards Apple’s mobile devices. While still in beta, with twenty locations currently trialing the device across the startup-heavy San Francisco, it will be interesting to see this product evolve and if what seems to be a brilliant idea can become a lifechanging reality.

The Creative Commons, in my opinion - despite the recent Wikipedia relicensing debate - hold some of the best licenses of the internet age, encouraging the growth of freely available content whilst still allowing for restrictions on certain types of use to be imposed by the owner. It boils down to four major aspects, abbreviated to two letter acronyms: BY, NC, ND and SA. Attribution (BY) is the most common Creative Commons license property to be imposed: it allows the content owner to request that users of their items ‘link’ back to the original page, naming the author and providing some recognition for the work; non-Commercial (NC) prevents commercial organisations from using licensed work for their own gain, unless it is authorised; ND, or no derivatives, prevents people from modifying your original work, and SA, share-alike, allows modification but forces users to also license under CC.

So now that ridiculously long and terribly confusing sentence is over we can move on. The Daily Mail has again used photographs found on flickr, licensed under the CC, without following any of the licensing terms. This isn’t a one off occurrence either, they’ve repeatedly used the internet as a source of free content for use on their stories - and some have barely any text: here photos are taken from a flickr, which is rightly attributed, but in looking at the photo details it’s clearly under full copyright with all rights reserved. The latest article today on the international craze of ‘moneyfacing’, which I’ve personally never heard of and is barely news, here has stolen the photos of @tshannon and is ignoring her requests for them to remove them. According to her latest status update The Sun are also using the content in their print edition. The Telegraph, who initially copied the Mail, were at least quick to get back to the content owner about attribution - and this is really what annoys me: attribution.

It’s not as if, in this case, the content owners are even asking to be paid. The previous article with the incredible pictures of lightning should have never been posted, but this was made to be shared freely; mentioning the author in the story costs nothing and helps generate rapport between producers. It helps the original owner gain some traffic.

How hard does it really have to be to follow a few simple requests? If we stole your content we’d be sued - national corporations should not be exempt from the law, especially when they make a profit from it.

Tweet @MattieTK with your thoughts.

The Guardian today reported the leak of an important document outlining plans for the world’s richest nations - including the UK and USA - to take climate control from the UN through legislative action involving carbon quotas. The analysed documents contain information that states, under the proposed legislation, select nations will be exempt from the proposed 1.44tons per capita, increasing their carbon allowance to twice that, and vetoing all power of smaller, developing nations in their rights to a say on global issues affecting them most dearly.

The Danish Texts are thought to be pushed through with the arrival of the most powerful man in the world: “It is being done in secret.”, notes a diplomat, “Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process.”

This draft seems incredibly dangerous for our future, and our children’s. The Maldives, a developing island nation, recently staged a cabinet meeting underwater to publicly demonstrate the dramatic effect climate change and specifically rising sea levels will have on their country; but under this new agreement they will have no say, and will have to develop slower as a carbon allowance is imposed. All this whilst an unrestricted, sooty China builds further coal-fired power stations and rich partygoers heat their British patios.