@mrblog lite

Here's my guess on iPhone 6 resolution scaling

leave a comment »

First, the announced resolutions:

iPhone 6: 750x1334 326ppi 4.7"

iPhone 6 Plus: 1080x1920 401ppi 5.5"

I think that means iPhone 6 will use @2x image assets resulting in screen coordinates of 375x667 "points" (vs. 320x568 for current 4" iPhone screens and breaking from the 320 point width of all existing iPhones).

I suspect iPhone 6 Plus will use @3x assets resulting in screen coordinates of 360x640 "points"

That gives both phones a 16:9 aspect ratio.

Written by mrblog

Sep 9, 2014


Standing a little taller today. Why I deleted the Secret App and had @getsecret delete my account

leave a comment »

For me, the problem with the Secret App isn't bullying or risks of getting exposed or slander or any of that. While all those things are real, they're certainly not exclusive to the Secret App.

My problem with this app is how it defines the degree of self indulgence and contempt by Silicon Valley and the tech. industry. While Rome burns, former Google engineers build something like Secret and Silicon Valley VCs invest in it; it's a rude slap in the face to everyone that actually works for a living, to those working to solve real problems in the world, to those just trying to get by, to those suffering, and to essentially all of humanity.

Secret app recently closed a $8.6 million round of financing from a number of top tier venture capitalist, including Garry Tan and Alexis Ohanian of Initialized Capital, MG Siegler of Google Ventures, Bing Gordon and Megan Quinn of KPCB, Chris Howard and Brad Silverberg of Fuel Capital, Vivi Nevo, SV Angel, Ashton Kutcher of A-Grade Investments, David Sacks, Bill Lee, Pete Cashmore among others. Tikue Anazodo

David Byttow launched Secret with former co-worker and Googler Chrys Bader. 

Byttow joined Google and spent five years working on hyped — but ultimately flawed — products: Google Wave and Google+.  There, he hired Bader as a product manager. - Alyson Shontell, BI

All of these people, the developers who built it and the VCs that enabled it, should be embarrassed and ashamed. But of course they're not. That's the point. They are so disconnected and insulated that they simply lack any empathy, infatuated with themselves, Silicon Valley, and VC culture - disinterest at best, disdain at worst.

Psychologist and social scientist Dacher Keltner says the rich really are different, and not in a good way: Their life experience makes them less empathetic, less altruistic, and generally more selfish. - Brian Alexander, NBC News

For me, participating in Secret makes one a party to this self-indulgence of the affluent and disconnected Silicon Valley 0.1%. It says one supports it. It's a giant F-you to the world.

Looking back in a few years, I hope Secret is a nadir, the bottom of the barrel, from which we crawled out and started building things of value that actually matter again.

Written by mrblog

Mar 25, 2014

I was wrong about Chromecast

leave a comment »

Seven months ago, when I first heard about Chromecast, I assumed it would follow in the footsteps of Google's prior attempts at consumer products, becoming a laughable epic fail.

Before Chromecast, Google's consumer products tended to be "by Google engineers, for Google engineers" too complex and too many features for average mainstream consumers. Somehow the Chromecast team managed to avoid the pressure to satisfy engineers, developers, and Silicon Valley geeks first. They were able to leave features out, to make the device simpler with fewer features, which is never easy for any company, but has been especially challenging for Google.

Many of the failed projects, like Google TV and Nexus Q, were based on Android. While not an absolute failure, one could certainly argue that even the Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 have not exactly been consumer hits, being more targeted to developers than average consumers. Chromecast is based on the Chrome operating system instead.

Regardless of the underlying OS, the important break away from prior Google consumer product attempts is that Chromecast puts non-technical every-day consumers first. So much so, that some of Google's usual early adopters, developers, have been critical of Chromecast and Google's new strategy.

It will be interesting to see if the success of Chromecast with consumers will be an outlier or a new trend. Either way, I was wrong about Chromecast and I really like what I see in this new approach to consumer products by the search giant.

Written by mrblog

Feb 17, 2014


The Secret app FAQ raises more questions than it answers @getsecret

leave a comment »

Secret is a new app that has been getting a lot of buzz recently. It purports to be another way to anonymously share text posts and images.

The app requires that you sign-in with an email and give it your phone number. When you first sign up "you’re automatically connected to the people in your Contacts who are also on Secret." According the FAQ:

Connections are made by matching on email address and/or phone number. On Secret, these are your “Friends”. We do this all without uploading contact details to our servers.

That seems a little misleading. If the app can "match" users by email address and/or phone number, then the app (client) must have sent those phone numbers / email addresses from your phone contacts to the server, at least for the "find matches" query, even if the server doesn't store all that data.

Also, is the above a one-time thing? What happens when a new user who happens to be in my Contacts joins Secret? When does the app become aware of this and how if the servers supposedly don't store my Contacts?

Perhaps what they mean by not uploading the "details" means Secret uploads one-way hashes for the phone numbers and email addresses and effectively every one of my contacts gets an "identity" on Secret, even if they are not signed up yet. Then, when they sign up, their account is matched to that email address and phone number (by hash), thus becoming associated with a "live" account. That would be consistent with how the app works, in that when you first sign up, there are already posts waiting for you, meaning that those posts were associated with my contact info even before I had an account on Secret - or i.e. that Secret "remembers" the post should be sent to me, based on on my email or phone number, even though I didn't exist on Secret at the time the post was created.

Is it really anonymous?

This also means that the Secret servers do maintain a direct relationship to your email and phone number (even if by hash), which suggests that Secret, the service / company, knows exactly who posts what.

This is how they answer this question on the Secret FAQ:

Does the Secret team know who posts what?

All of your posts are encrypted such that nobody, especially our team, can see your content. Your secrets are safe with us.

That is incredibly vague and utterly unsatisfactory. If every Secret app of every recipient iPhone that is allowed to see the post can display the content, then how is it encrypted, using what keys? How do all those apps get the keys? To satisfy security experts you're going to have to provide those details. And if you can't provide those details, then you're relying on "security through obscurity" which is a recipe for eventual hacks.

Let's ask this another way: would an author and the content of their posts be disclosed to law enforcement in the case of subpoena, court order, or similar legal action? If so, then the above FAQ answer is bogus.

My point is not that Secret, or any other app, should necessarily protect one from law enforcement. My point is that if Secret can obtain the data for law enforcement, then they also could technically obtain the data for whatever other purpose. And in that case, your posts are only "anonymous" as long as Secret decides so (or untiil Secret is hacked).

It's certainly interesting

All that said, the app itself is quite intriguing. I consider myself rather reserved and somewhat outside the loop. As a result, I expected to see nothing, or nearly nothing on Secret. Yet upon joining Secret, I have a timeline full of posts. I mean it is simply fascinating and scary at the same time. Who are these people? What is their connection to me? I suspect almost everything I'm seeing is via a small number of well-connected individuals, perhaps even a single individual.

Even if it were not anonymous, the algorithm and model for sharing is very interesting and potentially powerful.

Written by mrblog

Feb 8, 2014

Does this kind of spam really work?

leave a comment »

I suppose it must work, or they wouldn't do it, but I received the following in my email:

Hi, my name is Marlene J. Levesque and I am an Online Strategist.
The reason for my email is I have come across your site www.bdt.com and decided to run an analysis on your competition and your current search rankings. I also tried to look for your business on various social media sites and really couldn't find much else about you.
Over the last 12 months GOOGLE has placed so much importance on Content Creation & Social Media Performance that if your business isn't creating valuable content or even visible across social media platforms you have basically no chance of being seen on any search engine for keywords your customers are using to find businesses like you.
With a solid plan and strategy I honestly believe I can help get your website ranking higher on GOOGLE and getting customers to interact with your business on Social Media to really build your brand.
Can I call you and run some ideas I have to help your business grow?
Marlene J. Levesque

The irony here is if you go to my www.bdt.com site you will see the first heading says "Pleased to meet you, I'm David Beckemeyer" so if this person really went to the website, how would they define "competition" and to say they looked on social media sites and "really couldn't find much else about you." If they actually did a search for my name, the first thing that comes up is www.bdt.com followed by my Linkedin profile, my Twitter page, my blog, and finally my Google+ page. 

Also, how did the spammer find me? Likely via social media.

The final irony is that if you likewise search for Marlene J. Levesque, you don't find a damned thing.  So who isn't visible across social media platforms?

Written by mrblog

Apr 27, 2013