He’s René V. My grand grand-father. He was a smart guy. Ambitious. He was married with a pretty wife – actually my grand grand-mother. He had a good job, money and beautiful children. But unfortunately, René was unhappy. Because when he wanted to hear some music, he had to wait for the next “guiguette” organized in the village. When he wanted to see movies, he was obliged to take the train to reach Besançon – also called “THE TOWN” at this time- to go to the theater. When he wanted to meet new people, he utterly couldn’t. He only saw the same faces, the same smiles, at the village “pub”. A face like Jean-Claude’s, his old best friend (check the following picture).

Decades later, I can assure you that I am happier than my ancestor René. Why ? because, when I want to see a movie, I watch it on the Web thanks to the streaming technology, when I want to hear music, I go on Deezer and listen to my favourite songs… and I simply don’t pay for the music I hear ! When I want to meet new people, I check on My Facebook network… There is no supense anymore : you know what makes my life so happy. The World Wide Web. A thing my grand grand-father has never been told during his entire life.

And it’s maybe better like this : this ambitious, dynamic and great ancestor would have certainly disapproved the way Internet makes me living : without learning me how to wait, how to really know people, how to appreciate music because it’s rare…

Anyway. Forget about René’s statements : you just need to know that thanks to the Web, my life really rocks (or at least seems to rock) !

It deals with the link between the Internet and the financial crisis. Does the Internet affect the crisis ? if yes, in a good or a negative way ?

With Marie, one of CELSA‘s best analysts regarding the financial stakes our society is facing, I think we found very intersting answers to this question. Let’s watch it :

Due to the success of our first video, Marie and me decided to post another one, with special guests. It’s more deep. Less fun. But really good. Again : let’s watch it !

What do you think about it ? (not about the quality of these two deabates, but about the impact of the Web on the crisis…). Please, let me know your opinion by posting comments !

As you see, identity theft can cause really big damages in many lives… and according to me it is one of the most threatening cyber-crimes. The problem with the Internet is that you are always asked to give very personal information about you (where you live, what is your name, you social security number…). And sometimes, people don’t care enough about telling these information, for example on MSN, Facebook, and other social networks !

My advice to avoid identity theft is really simple : like in the real world, don’t say everything to everybody… especially when you don’t know who « everybody » is !!!

To learn more about this subject, click here.

As a matter of fact, more and more pedophiles use the Internet to lure children. This problem is based on two big failures :
-    The failures related to the children education (they are not warned enough at school or at home).
-    The failures of the websites themselves, that usually don’t spot pedophile users and pedophile contents.

And according to me, the popularity of social network dedicated to children, increases this danger… the web is a dangerous place for both adult and their children…

Thanks to collaborative tools provided by the Internet (wiki, blog, groupware…), the old pyramidal paradigme is out of fashion !

history

Here is the new pattern. The one that will allow employess to work together, in a more efficient way :

Put the CEO in the center of this circle, and the employees around. There is still a hierarchy, but it is a collaborative one. Say hello to modernity for me !

A very intuitive interface. Well organised sections. Thanks to jobintree.com it’s became easy to find a job.

This site is certainly in the air of the time : there are tag clouds, personal sections, RSS alert… Let’s prove it by a few screen shots :

Don’t hesite to visit it and tell me what you think about this website !

Actually, I currently work at in a 65 employees a society that has 65 salaries. She It is located Rue Maubert at in Paris, in at the 15^th arrondisement in the street called Rue Maubert. Her Its purpose reason is to sell commercialize softwares for children’s logiciels.

She It receives perceives a subvention subsidy from the state to for hiring embauch young interns stagiaires. That is how I received got my job post as a “sell man” commercial. In the first time At the beginning, my this job title was entitled “responsible of marketing manager”, but I made it changed jobs.

We sell a range gamme of products with the branded mark Youngsoft. We have many expenses charges associated with related to marketing. Our posting in the metro prints  in the subway is one of the most expensive one. Our RP PR department also has a very large budget too. We realize our own advertisements pubs with our redaction staff, and we do our own user text books edition of user manuals.

Our quaterly trimestrial results sales for this year have all been all very positive. Our market is a buyer’s one for the time being very demanding interesting right now, and that is why our sales figures are increasing we gain funds.

We want to sell commercialize our products in Tahiti because we think metropolitan customers would be interested in buying them.

To sum up In resume , because of our ethics positive deontology and interesting market niche, we are have a very good prospect rosy future.

There is a big problem that the Internet can solve. What I could call “THE” problem of the whole humanity. Darius, Cesar, Georges Washington, Churchill… all these men have arlready faced this problem.

I should put a stop to this unberable suspense. This problem is called war.

How could the Internet solve such a problem? Here are two ideas, one is quite unconventional and the second is more acceptable.

1) From Marathon’s battle to WWII, winning a war has always been a national stake… and the Internet is a good way to win a war.

It is said that one of the very good intuition of Napoléon the 1^st was that an army was nothing without an efficient “backup”: sending his men away implied the creation of very efficient “lignes de liaison” to supply them with food, alcool and munitions. Conclusion: when two states are fightening against each others, it’s not only a conflict between warriors, or weapons. It’s a conflict between two “organisations” (in the large acception of the word).

This analysis of the modern war is undeniable when people study the two “world wars” (“total warfares”) or the Cold War. Warriors against warriors. Military infrastructures against military infrastructures. Ideology against ideology.

The new stake is not to destroy the other army anymore, but to demolish the ennemy’s societal paradigm.And the best way to demolish it, is certainly to attack the facilities and others civilian infrastructures of the opponent. Today, destroying an aerial antenna can be considered as an act of war… and also as an efficient way to win a war (“The bombing of Al Manar is a clear demonstration that Israel has a policy of using violence to silence media it doesn’t agree with. This action means media can become routine targets in every conflict” Aidan White, General Secretary, International Federation of Journalists – you can read all the document the previous quotation comes from by clicking here).

But let’s get back to the point. I guess you already have understood what I wanted to mean: by leading a cyber-attack against the opponent state you can easily win a war. Attack its online bank accounts, all its datarooms… and this will create a real panic able to paralyse the wole economy and to undermine the social organisation of this state.

Here are two examples of cyber attack and the damages it can cause : 1 & 2.

Conclusion: if you adopt a kind of old fashion “nationalist” point of view (which is relly not mine): Internet can solve the problem of war by helping the state to win the war.

2) The second idea is more idealistic, but this is an idea I really support:

There will always be wars. This is more an easy observation than an awsome intuition. And personally I am not idealistic enough to think that people really can put a stop to conflicts. But I have beautiful dream: that one day two countries would fight against each others without deploring one dead. And it’s easy to note that a cyber attack causes maybe more victims but far less dead than a real battle.

What do you think about this point of view?

It’s been a long time since I have write about this subject… The first post of these series, that you can read here, was about cyber adiction. In this post I will  speak about violence on the Internet.

People always think that the television has increased the violence by broadcasting shocking movies, pictures, reports to a very large audience. Could we criticize the Internet in the same way ? According to me, it would be unfair. In fact, in my opinion, Web’s users are responsible for the content broadcasted on the Net, because they create and publish this content, whereas television is based on a less participative paradigm (top-down).

Two phenomenons prove that the Net has became a more and more violent place because of it own users :

-the happy slapping : it’s the most popular game for the young British guys. The concept is pretty basic : you pick a victim, you beat this victim, and one of your friends film this agression at the same time. Then you broacast your video on youtube… and you become popular among others stupid guys that are crazy about free-violence.

-pornography : there is more and more pornographic content broadcasted on “user generated content” Websites. I have read a very intersting article about this subject in the french edition of the last GQ, that you can buy here. What does this mean ? that violence and pronographic contents are quite of invading the web. But it’s not due to the Internet, it’s because of us. Or more exactly because of a few people hidden behind this “us”.

Barack Obama’s electoral campaign is a perfect example. Instead of asking money to Washington’s lobbyists, Barack decided to ask people to donate little amounts on the Web. The result of this very innovative initiative is pretty astonishing : Obama raised about twice over his competitor, John MacCain ! And we mustn’t forget that the fact not to depend on lobbyists’ money was an efficient political argument…

A lot of N.G.O. also try to make money on the Web… exactly like Obama, they just ask people to donate, but according to me, this is not innovative enough to be really efficient…