Translate:
Latest SEO Articles: Speaking At:
    Speaking at SMX London 2013
Follow Us:
Follow beanstalkseo on Twitter
Hear Us On:
Webmaster Radio
Blog Partner Of:
WebProNews Blog Partner
Helping Out:
Carbon balanced.
Archives
  • RSS

    XMLRSS

    Beanstalk's SEO News Blog

    At Beanstalk Search Engine Optimization we know that knowledge is power. That's the reason we started this SEO blog. We know that the better informed our visitors are, the better the decisions they will make for their websites and their online businesses. We hope you enjoy your stay and find the SEO news contained within this blog useful.


    June 4, 2012

    Online Privacy Offenders List: Who’s Got Your Back?

    Concerned about your online privacy? You should be according to a new study from the Electronic Frontier Foundation in which they investigated the privacy policies of 18 major Internet brands and companies in an effort to assess whether these companies will publicly commit to protecting their users when a government agency seeks access to user data.

    online privacy

    The EFF looked at criteria such as company’s terms of service, privacy policies, published law enforcement guides (if any) when putting together their list of "Who’s Has Your Back?"

    Other criteria considered was the company’s past history of advocating for user privacy in the courts and if they were members of the Digital Due Process coalition who works to improve outdated communications laws. EFF also contacted the companies directly with their finding to give each an opportunity to respond and provide evidence of improved policies or practices.

    The EFF states that the purpose of this report is an attempt to hold accountable those companies that hold private user data. EFF hopes this report will encourage these companies to make public commitments to defend its users against over-reaching government bodies.

    "The purpose of this report is to incentivize companies to be transparent about what data flows to the government and encourage them to take a stand for user privacy when it is possible to do so."

    Some factors that the EFF used to evaluate each of the companies:

    1. A public commitment to inform users when their data is sought by the government.
    2. Transparency about when and how often companied hand data to the government.
    3. History of Fighting for user’s privacy rights in the courts.
    4. Will fight for user’s privacy in congress.

    Who's Got Your Back Infographic

    The Results?

    The short answer is that the worst companies for protecting user privacy were shown to be Skype, Verizon, Yahoo!, AT&T, Apple & Microsoft.

    • Facebook, Dropbox and Twitter have upgraded their practices in the last year.
    • Comcast and Yahoo! gained a recognition for advocating for user privacy, but failed in all other areas.
    • AT&T, Microsoft & Apple, although members of the DDP coalition did not observe any other best practices factored into the report.
    • AT&T, Verizon and MySpace Comcast were rated the lowest in overall privacy protection; which is especially troubling considering that they provide internet connectivity to many thousands of subscribers.

    SEO news blog post by @ 11:33 am


     

    January 19, 2012

    Leftover SOPA scum

    Congrats to everyone that participated in the SOPA/PIPA Jan 18th blackout, even if all you did was sit on Twitter and complain(some strong language was used), you did something to bring the topic into the foreground.

    The internet is unified

    Yesterday’s on-line unity was a clear message to the political parties backing these bills. Last I checked the opposition to PIPA was only 6 senators away from the required 41 “no” votes needed to keep PIPA stuck in the Senate for good. While I haven’t seen a public list of senator opposition to SOPA, it too needs 41 “no” votes to end the future of the bill.

    While this sounds great, it really just means that the entertainment industry, and fans of public censorship, now have to try even harder to keep their efforts out of the public eye. Make no mistake, there are people, wealthy and misguided, that will keep trying to find a way to sneak this sort of law through. Don’t think that’s a fair/optimistic assessment of the situation, well here’s the flip side (Very strong language/opinion warning) from Mr.Maddox.

    Just last night I was trying to get some programming done while watching a bunch of movies I’ve been backlogged on. One of the movies in the stack was ‘Kick-Ass‘ and I won’t spoil a decent film for you with too much info, but there’s a scene where they are streaming a web broadcast live on the news. As the live stream becomes ‘too violent’ for television the audience quickly switches to the web to watch the rest of the live stream on-line.

    While most folks watching the film were probably totally distracted by the context of the scene, I was immediately thinking about all the conservative types watching this unfold and thinking to themselves:

    ‘This should never be possible, we should have the ability to censor a live stream that is so disturbing! If it can’t be shown on TV it shouldn’t be viewable on the Internet! Just think of all the things the internet could broadcast un-censored! We need something like this SOPA/PIPA thing we can abuse!’

    I’m not sure if the big players in Hollywood actually intended that sort of reaction to the scene, I’m not saying the film is a brain-wash attempt by the industry, but the thought did cross my very ‘open’ mind, so it stands to reason I wouldn’t be the only one.

    In fact if you haven’t looked at ACTA, you might want to check it out. This is a more international version of PIPA/SOPA with the same issues surrounding loose definitions and loopholes that could be exploited while doing little to actually stop piracy. ACTA has been bouncing around since 2006 with a bunch of countries already signed on to the current version.

    The closure date for signing onto ACTA isn’t until 2013 but it looks like there may be some difficulties getting all signing countries to agree on a final version (yay for diversity!). A notably large issue of ACTA, especially in the eyes of the EFF, is that it has been drafted in secret, hidden from public eyes by participating governments around the world. So if you haven’t poked your nose into it, you really should.

    Speaking of closure, I think Chia Bart’s pretty much grown all that he will and I’m cheating now to try and get the top of his head to sprout.

    Chia Bart # 6 - Looking leafyLeaf me alone! The kid is not my sun!

    SEO news blog post by @ 12:25 pm


     

    June 21, 2011

    Bitcoin takes a beating..

    Bitcoin had a serious case of the Mondays yesterday as the EFF dropped the currency for donations, and MtGox, a major international exchange, managed to spill over $5 million worth of BTC in a public ‘free for all’ moment. One lucky fellow snatched up over $5 million worth of BTC with a mere $2,613 by wisely setting an unlimited buy order at $0.0101 (everyone else was bidding $0.01).

    The EFFs move wasn’t so bad when you pick it apart. Accepting any donation might seem harmless, but if the charity needs to convert that donation to a currency then it becomes an issue. The EFF cannot responsibly spend BTC, or exchange it, without exposing themselves to legal entanglement in doing so. Until the currency is ‘trouble free’ the best option for a huge non-profit is to avoid that donation.

    In a post from Cindy Cohn on the EFF blog the issue is broken down three ways:
    EFF Logo

    • Lack of understanding with regard to legality of BTC
    • Misleading donors with regard to value and use of donations
    • Giving a false endorsement of Bitcoin technology

    Going forward the EFFs plan is to simply dump the donated BTC into the public faucet where they will be given away in small chunks to fresh Bitcoin users (or existing users who have never drank from the faucet). Don’t hurt yourself rushing on over for your handout, the current give-aways are only around 55 cents US when there’s more than 50 BTC in the faucet.

    Speaking of give-aways, the $5 million I mentioned at the start of the article is apparently pending the decision of the folks running the exchange. The story is the very essence of TL;DR, so let me try to put it into point form:
    BTC Value

    • MtGox setup a BTC exchange in Japan
    • MtGox’s auditors were hacked and an encrypted file was stolen
    • Alerts went out to change passwords and secure accounts
    • At some point on the 19th an MtGox user put a gigantic sell order up
    • As the sell was taking place Kevin Day took note, offering $0.0101 per BTC
    • By the end of the trading Kevin had purchased ~260k BTC for $2,613
    • Kevin took out 643.27BTC (~$8,000 US) and placed it into a personal wallet
    • MtGox claims that the day of trading broke exchange rules and must be reversed
    • Initially MtGox was considering a review by the FBI but at the moment it seems they are focused on a roll-back
    • MtGox has not mentioned an ability to reverse coins that left the exchange which creates a large problem

    At this point the MtGox sites are having a hard time staying up and as of 11:40AM GMT they are struggling to allow users access to ‘reclaim’ accounts. I gave up on the site personally and have just been looking in Google’s cached results (a great solution for overloaded websites any time something like this happens).

    There is also mention of the exchange going back on-line when the accounts are sorted out, and the claim that once the site is back on-line, trades 218869~222470 will be reverted and the exchange price will be going back to ~$17.50/BTC. Given everything that has happened this seems really optimistic to me.

    Can’t wait to see what happens tomorrow.

    SEO news blog post by @ 8:48 pm


     

    Level Triple-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
    Copyright© 2004-2013
    Beanstalk Search Engine Optimization, Inc.
    All rights reserved.