THE AGE OF EMAIL STRESS

If

its followers were a country, it would be twice as populous as China. These 2.5 billion people give an hour every day to their faith—email. As with all things Internet related, email gained adherents at a prodigious rate. The first email message was sent in 1971, but widespread use began only by 1995.

In 30 years, email went from being a revolutionary replacement for the postal department—what we now call snail mail—to being a replacement, sometimes, for speech.

“Now we know that emails are often exchanged between people sitting in the same building—or even in the same room!” says a new study called “You’ve Got Mail!” from the Future Work Centre, a UK research institute. After surveying 2,000 users in the UK—the findings are not likely to be particularly different elsewhere—they have some disquieting explanations as to what email is doing to its users.

The problem is the “bad habits” that email users develop: leaving email on all day (62%) and sending emails automatically to inboxes (50%), which is what most people I know do—oh, yes, myself included.

This unceasing deluge is sparked by a desire to be in control. You know, to avoid the shock when your phone tells you 50 emails are pending. To avoid such stressful situations, you check your email—in the morning and late at night—and believe you are staying ahead. But the Future Work Centre study showed that these habits instead cause more stress and make your life more difficult.

This is primarily about work. Of the 196.3 billion emails sent every day in 2014, 55% were work-related, according to a 2014 study from the Radicati group, a US technology market-research firm.

“Email remains the most pervasive form of communication in the business world, while other technologies such as social networking, instant messaging (IM), mobile IM, and others are also taking hold, email remains the most ubiquitous form of business communication,” the Radicati study said.

However, consumer—or non-business—email traffic is slowing, presumably moving to social networking sites, instant messaging, mobile IM, and SMS/ text messaging.

With its ubiquity in the lives of the globalized business elite, email has become different things for different people, acknowledges the UK study, pointing to other research that has thrown up conflicting results. So, email volume is a predictor of stress and, sometimes, it isn’t. Frequently checking your email can reduce stress, but it can also spark it. Filing your email in neat folders is linked to higher productivity— and lower efficiency.

What this adds up to is that the effects of email use on people is likely to vary.

“Our research shows that email is a double-edged sword,” said Richard McKinnon, a Future of Work researcher, quoted on the website Eurekalert.org, while addressing the British Psychological Society this week. “Whilst it can be a valuable communication tool, it’s clear that it’s a source of stress, of frustration for many of us. The people who reported it being most useful to them also reported the highest levels of email pressure! But the habits we develop, the emotional reactions we have to messages and the unwritten organizational etiquette around email, combine into a toxic source of stress which could be negatively impacting our productivity and well-being.”

Here are some of the stressors. Email has no clear norms with regard to language, familiarity and speed of response, and no “non-verbal” cues, such as body language, so the potential for misunderstandings, misinterpretations—and stress—abounds.

Unlike face-to-face communication or phone calls, email does not allow selfcorrection “in the moment”, which means another email must be sent. The feeling of email overload, as some studies have noted, can result in physical stress and emotional exhaustion.

Finally, email can be a distraction, taking away time from other important activities, from eating to intimacy.

A sidelight that McKinnon and his team stumbled on during their research was that the feeling of being pressured by email was significantly higher among users of Mac operating systems, when compared to Windows; more among iOS (iPhone) users when compared to Android, Windows or BlackBerry.

Users of Windows smartphones reported the lowest levels of perceived email pressure. Why? “At this stage, we don’t know,” said the study.

So, what can you do about email stress? The researchers recommend:

* To the early morning/late night checkers—put your phone away; do you really need to check your email?

* How about planning your day and prioritizing your work, before the priorities of others flood your inbox?

* Consider turning off ‘push notifications’ and/or turning off your email app for portions of the day, and take control of when you receive email.

There’s no harm trying. You have nothing to lose but your stress.

Samar Halarnkar is editor of Indiaspend.org, a data-driven, publicinterest journalism, non-profit organization. He also writes the column Our Daily Bread in Mint Lounge.

Source: www.livemint.com/frontiermail

Is the Internet a public good?

As an enabler of development, its primary value is for providing access to other basic goods and services

The growth of the Internet in the 1990s led to the fear of a new kind of social inequity in the form of the digital divide. A contrary view was that the new technology had the potential to overcome previously existing divides, provided government support was available in order to overcome the challenges of ICT (information and communications technology) in under-served areas. A view not examined enough is the relevance of the Internet in the context of the need to balance the allocation of scarce public money among different urgent priorities.

The European Union Universal Service Directive of 2002 suggested that a necessary condition for a service to be included within the ambit of universal service is that, in the light of social, economic and technological developments, the ability to use the service has become critical for social inclusion—that is, it is a consumption norm.

Some governments have tried to operationalize the notion by setting a trigger mechanism in the form of a minimum number of users of a service that would need to be crossed before provision of subsidies for its universalization is considered. While the number of Internet users in India has multiplied, the number of active users is still too low for the Internet to be considered a “consumption norm” that a government is obligated to provide.

Government funds can also be deployed to correct market failures and realize positive externalities. Since the 1980s, sophisticated statistical techniques have been used to establish cause-effect relationships between the adoption of new technologies—the mobile phone, the Internet and broadband—and gross domestic product (GDP) growth. In India, for example, such studies show that a 10% increase in Internet penetration can increase the GDP by 1.6% in the presence of a minimum penetration level of 25%. These studies have become the basis for calls for the use of public money for Internet access and broadband expansion.

However, there are three major conceptual issues with such policy conclusions. First, these studies do not claim that the new technologies will yield positive spillovers prior to the threshold level of penetration being reached. Many under-served areas lie far below the threshold. Second, these studies do not establish that the bang per buck of the new technology is greater than that for other basic inputs such as education, roads or health. Third, these econometric studies are typically carried out with either a country or a province within a country as the unit of analysis. Given the immense size and heterogeneity of the unit, the claims do not automatically extend to the sub-unit level—for example, to rural areas within a province.

Indeed, there are reasons to believe that the externalities may not accrue in many rural areas at their present level of development. Unlike roads, the provision of digital connectivity is not sufficient to ensure empowerment or even equitable inclusion of the target population. The reaping of benefits requires the ability and willingness to use the new technology on the part of the intended beneficiaries, relevant content and applications, and affordability. Mere access without a host of complementary inputs is unlikely to lead to positive spillovers.

As per the “enabler of development” rationale, the Internet has value not in and of itself but rather as a medium that gives access to other basic goods and services. Indeed, ICT for development projects cover many domains including healthcare, education, online government services and the provision of commodity price information to small producers.

Two implications emerge from this. First, the level of provision of the basic goods and services facilitated via ICT should adhere to some consumption norm. In the case of the provision of health services, for example, the government needs to aim for a level that at the minimum achieves the targets of the Millennium Development Goals. Second, since the provision of basic services using ICT is dependent on the availability of other complementary inputs, the decision on the level of a particular ICT service that is to be provided cannot be made without reference to the presence of other complementary inputs. Continuing with the healthcare example, the ICT network should develop in rough alignment with the complementary institutions, processes and skills needed to provide remote medical services.

The provision of connectivity can to some extent substitute for the other inputs. However, the substitutability peters out beyond a point and then the provision of advanced connectivity amounts to wastage of social resources.

There is also the view that the provision of connectivity will trigger the provision of complementary inputs and the development of ability to use (“build it and they will come”). However, the experience of several government schemes in India shows that there are limits to this rationale for advance build-out of connectivity.

The conclusions from this exploration are that “universal access” to the Internet need not be interpreted as “uniform access” and the build-out of networks should be aligned to the absorptive capacity of a region. The deliberations on the national optic fibre network and “free basics” could benefit from such a nuanced approach.

Source: http://epaper.livemint.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

Nothing free or basic about it

We need to provide full Internet at prices people can afford, not privilege private platforms. This is where India’s regulatory system has to step in

The airwaves, the newspapers and even the online space are now saturated with a Rs. 100 crore campaign proclaiming that Internet connectivity for the Indian poor is a gift from Facebook which a few churlish net neutrality fundamentalists are opposing. In its campaign, Facebook is also using the generic phrase “free, basic Internet” interchangeably with “Free Basics”, the name it has given its private, proprietary platform. This is in blatant violation of Indian rules on advertising, which forbid generic words being used for brands and products. This is from a company which, in spite of having 125 million Indian subscribers, refuses to be sued in India, claiming to be an American company and therefore outside the purview of Indian law. Nor does it pay any tax in India.

The Free Basics platform is a mildly tweaked rehash of the controversial internet.org that Facebook had floated earlier. Facebook and Reliance, the sixth-largest mobile service provider in the country, have joined hands to offer it as a platform for free data services restricted to a few websites. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has stopped this service for now, pending its public consultation on the subject. Facebook’s campaign is essentially to influence the outcome of such a consultation.

Data as commodity

Evgeny Morozov, one of the most insightful commentators on technology, has written extensively on how Silicon Valley seeks to subvert the state, promising to give the people connectivity, transport and other facilities, if we only hand over our data to them. Instead of people demanding that the state provide access to various services — from drinking water to transport and communications — people are being led to believe that a few capitalists from Silicon Valley will provide all these services. We will have Internet connectivity instead of education, and Uber will provide private taxis, instead of public transport. To paraphrase Marie Antoinette, let the people have cake instead of bread. This is the Internet monopolies’ agenda of hidden and mass-scale privatisation of public services.

By accepting the Silicon Valley model of private services, we pay the Internet monopolies with our data, which can then be monetised. Personal data is the currency of the Internet economy. Data as commodity is the oil of the 21st century. Facebook and Google’s revenue model is based on monetising our personal data and selling it to advertisers. Facebook generates an estimated revenue of nearly $1 billion from its Indian subscribers, on which it pays no tax.

Free Basics is not free, basic Internet as its name appears to imply. It has a version of Facebook, and only a few other websites and services that are willing to partner Facebook’s proprietary platform.

Today, there are nearly 1 billion websites. If we consider that there are 3.5 billion users of the Internet, 1 out of 3.5 such users also offers content or services. The reason that the Internet has become such a powerful force for change in such a short time is precisely because anybody, anywhere, can connect to anybody else, not only to receive, but also to provide content. All that is required is that both sides have access to the Internet.

All this would stop if the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) or telecom companies (telcos) are given the right to act as gatekeepers. This is what net neutrality is all about — no ISP or telco can decide what part of the Internet or which websites we can access. Tim Wu, the father of net neutrality, has written that keeping the two sides of the Internet free of gatekeepers is what has given a huge incentive for generating innovation and creating content. This is what has made the Internet, as a platform, so different from other mass communications platforms such as radio and television. Essentially, it has unleashed the creativity of the masses; and it is this creativity we see in the hundreds of millions of active websites.

Facebook’s ads and Mark Zuckerberg’s advertorials talk about education, health and other services being provided by Free Basics, without telling us how on earth we are going to access doctors and medicines through the Internet; or education. It forgets that while English is spoken by only about 12 per cent of the world’s population, 53 per cent of the Internet’s content is English. If Indians need to access education or health services, they need to access it in their languages, and not in English. And no education can succeed without teachers. The Internet is not a substitute for schools and colleges but only a complement, that too if material exists in the languages that the students understand. Similarly, health demands clinics, hospitals and doctors, not a few websites on a private Facebook platform.

Regulate price of data

While the Free Basics platform has connected only 15 million people in different parts of the world, in India, we have had 60 million people join the Internet using mobiles in the last 12 months alone. And this is in spite of the high cost of mobile data charges. There are 300 million mobile broadband users in the country, an increase fuelled by the falling price of smartphones.

In spite of this increase in connectivity, we have another 600 million mobile subscribers who need to be connected to the Internet. Instead of providing Facebook and its few partner websites and calling it “basic” Internet, we need to provide full Internet at prices that people can afford. This is where the regulatory system of the country has to step in. The main barrier to Internet connectivity is the high cost of data services in the country. If we use purchasing power parity as a basis, India has expensive data services compared to most countries. That is the main barrier to Internet penetration. Till now, TRAI has not regulated data tariffs. It is time it addresses the high price of data in the country and not let such prices lead to a completely truncated Internet for the poor.

There are various ways of providing free Internet, or cost-effective Internet, to the low-end subscribers. They could be provided some free data with their data connection, or get some free time slots when the traffic on the network is low. 2G data prices can and should be brought down drastically, as the telcos have already made their investments and recovered costs from the subscribers.

The danger of privileging a private platform such as Free Basics over a public Internet is that it introduces a new kind of digital divide among the people. A large fraction of those who will join such platforms may come to believe that Facebook is indeed the Internet. As Morozov writes, the digital divide today is “about those who can afford not to be stuck in the data clutches of Silicon Valley — counting on public money or their own capital to pay for connectivity — and those who are too poor to resist the tempting offers of Google and Facebook” (“Silicon Valley exploits time and space to extend the frontiers of capitalism”, The Guardian, Nov. 29, 2015). As he points out, the basic delusion Silicon Valley is nurturing is that the power divide will be bridged through Internet connectivity, no matter who provides it or in what form. This is not likely to happen through their platforms.

The British Empire was based on the control of the seas. Today, whoever controls the data oceans controls the global economy. Silicon Valley’s data grab is the new form of colonialism we are witnessing now.

Net neutrality is not an esoteric matter, the concern of only a few netizens. It is fundamental to the world, in which the Internet is a source of knowledge, a means of communication, an artery of commerce. Whoever controls access to the Internet will control our future. This is what the current battle over Facebook’s Free Basics is all about.

(Prabir Purkayastha is chairperson, Knowledge Commons, and vice-president, Free Software Movement of India.)

Keywords: Free Basics, Facebook, Silicon Valley, net neutrality

Source: The Hindu, 30-12-2015

Cloud computing, in the steel city

Academic writing, practical work and presentations helped the writer realise her research potential at Sheffield Hallam University.

The drive to pursue a career in cloud computing, the technology buzzword in 2012, was planted in me by a senior IT professional while I was working at IBM. My background in IT and business management made him suggest this career shift. I was disappointed by the lack of cloud computing courses on offer in India.

Moving abroad was a difficult choice for me as my husband’s career was also at stake. With inputs from an international educational advisor and weighing the pros and cons of the global choices available, I applied to Sheffield Hallam University’s M.Sc. in Web and Cloud Computing. I was lucky enough to get my offer letter in person from the university delegates who were on an official visit to the country.

I was also awarded a scholarship based on my past academic and professional achievements.

FIRST IMPRESSION

The university has a wonderful induction week and an active international student service team. I was immediately made to feel at home by the staff, both teaching and non-teaching and the student volunteers. Sheffield, also known as the steel city with its contribution to industrial revolution in the 19th century, is home to two lovely universities. Sheffield Hallam University is a modern university which was formed following the higher education reforms after World War II, but the campus boasts a proud history dating back to 1836. The University of Sheffield is a Russell group University which is more than a century old. The clubs, pubs and other entertainment venues in the city host one of the country’s best fresher’s weeks for the students. Actively participating in the events organised by the university helped me meet students from across the world and make friends.

Practical experience

While I was in India, I had been quoting experts in my academic writing or reproducing definitions in textbooks without proper referencing, not knowing that I was inadvertently committing an unforgivable mistake — plagiarism. This was the first major hurdle I had to encounter, but thanks to the university’s foresight, the first module in our master’s degree introduced us to the British way of academic writing. The master’s degree, unlike in India, is not one where you get taught everything to earn a degree; instead students are introduced to topics and are actively encouraged to conduct desk research, group activities, presentations and so on to improve the subject knowledge. Less emphasis is laid on exams and more on academic writing, group assessments, practical work and presentations that contribute to the awarding of the degree. The master’s courses have a dissertation or project work which provides a platform for research and development.

I realised my research potential during my dissertation and decided to enrol for PhD in the university.

The writer pursued M.Sc. Web and Cloud Computing at Sheffield Hallam University, U.K. She is now she is studying for a PhD at the university.

Keywords: cloud computing, career in cloud computing, Sheffield Hallam University, study abroad, study in US, education abroad, M.Sc. in Web and Cloud Computing

Source: The Hindu, 13-12-2015

Internet makes us rely less on our knowledge'

Toronto IANS





People are less willing to rely on their knowledge and say they know something when they have access to internet, suggesting that our connection to the web is affecting how we think, a new study has found.Researchers from the University of Waterloo in Canada asked about 100 participants a series of general-knowledge questions, such as naming the capital of France. Participants indicated if they knew the answer or not. For half of the study , participants had access to internet. They had to look up the answer when they responded that they did not know the answer. In the other half of the study , participants did not have internet access.
The team found that the people who had access to the web were about 5% more likely to say that they did not know the answer to the question. Furthermore, in some contexts, the people with access to internet reported feeling as though they knew less compared to the people without access.
“With the ubiquity of the internet, we are almost constantly connected to large amounts of information. And when that data is within reach, people seem less likely to rely on their own knowledge,“ said professor Evan F Risko, from the University of Waterloo, who led the study .
In interpreting the results, the researchers specula ted that access to internet might make it less acceptable to say you know something but are incorrect. It is also possible that participants were more likely to say they did not know an answer when they had access to the web because online searching offers an opportunity to confirm their answer or resolve their curiosity, and the process of finding out is rewarding.
Punctuation can tell how sincere a text message is
The way you punctuate your text messages reveals how sincere you are in communication, a new study said. Text messages that end with a period are perceived to be less sincere than messages that do not, said the study from Binghamton University in New York.“Punctuation is used and understood by texters to convey emotions and other social and pragmatic information. It's not surprising that as texting evolves, people are finding ways to convey the same types of information in their texts,“ said lead researcher Celia Klin. In some very recent follow-up work, Klin's team found that a text response with an exclamation mark is interpreted as more, rather than less, sincere.

Source: Times of India, 10-12-2015

HOW TO PROTECT YOUR LAPTOP FROM THEFT...

Your laptop is probably the most expensive portable device you own. What makes it even more valuable is the data ­ personal and official ­ that you store on it. But, if you carry your notebook PC on work trips and holidays, there's a chance that you might misplace it ­ or worse, it could get stolen.Thankfully, there's useful anti-theft technology that could not only prevent someone from stealing it, but could even help you track your laptop if it's stolen and also keep your sensitive data safe from prying eyes. KENSINGTON LOCK I f you look at the side of your laptop, you might find a little slot that's called the Kensington Lock (usually marked with a padlock sign). This slot is a metalreinforced hole using which you can tether your laptop to a table or other immovable furniture.

To do this, you will require the Kensington Lock, which can be bought from online stores for as less as `200. The lock comprises a metal anchor attached to a metal cable with a loop at the end.

To secure your laptop, all you have to do is loop the cable around a heavy or immovable object like a table leg, and push the metal anchor into the laptop's slot. This anchor can then be locked into place with a key or a combination lock.

The Kensington Lock is useful when it comes to protecting your device from thefts at locations like airports, public libraries, hotel lobbies and coffee shops.It is the first step in protecting your gear when you leave it unattended.

TRACK YOUR LAPTOP

In the event that your laptop is stolen or misplaced, it would help if you had a `tracking' software installed on your computer. And the cheapest way to do this is to install Prey ­ a free tool from the Prey Project.

First, go to preyproject.com, download and install the software on your laptop. This utility is available for Windows, Mac OS X, and even UbuntuDebian machines.

After installation, the software will require you to create a free account by registering with an e-mail address and password.

Once you've logged in, Prey will immediately be up and running on your computer.

Now, in case you've lost or misplaced this machine, simply go to preyproject.com from another PC, and log in with your account details. You will be taken to a web page that displays your lost laptop's location on a map (see screenshot).

From this page, you can indicate that your laptop is missing and Prey automatically generates reports on its whereabouts. The dashboard even lets you trigger a 30-second alarm on your device (provided its volume control is on); send a message to the person using your laptop asking them to return it to you (if it has been misplaced), and even remotely lock the laptop with a password.

A free account lets you register and track up to three devices, but if you opt for a paid Pro account, Prey lets you track anything between 10 to 500 devices (ideal for corporates). It also promises you accelerated tracking, priority support, as well as the option to delete files remotely.

It should be noted, that in order for your laptop to be tracked, it will need to be switched on and connected to the internet.

Alternatively , you could visit http:www.lockittight.com and try the free tool that's available for laptops running Windows XP , Vista, Win 7 and 8. Its installation procedure is similar to Prey ­ and while its user interface is not as intuitive, it packs in extra features such as letting you remotely use your laptop's camera to shoot a picture of the person using the device, capture a screenshot of what it is displaying, access browser history , and more from its Settings option.

ENCRYPTING DATA

Tracking your stolen laptop is one thing, protecting the data stored on it is quite another. File encryption to the rescue. To safeguard your sensitive data, you should make it a practice to encrypt all your important files on the laptop.This will make it tougher for an intruder to gain access to the data on the hard drive.

The simplest way to encrypt files and folders is with the Encrypting File System (EFS) in Windows. You will be able use this feature if your laptop runs on Windows XP7 Professional, Vista Business, or Windows 88.110 Pro. This encryption technology is linked to your computer login, so anyone with access to your computer's password will have access to the encrypted files. It is therefore advised that you create a guest account for other users who might be using your machine if you don't want them to access your confidential information.

To encrypt...

Right-click the file or folder you want to protect and click Properties.

In the dialog box that appears. Select the General tab, and click on the Advanced button.

This will open the Advanced Attributes dialog box.

Here, select the Encrypt contents to secure data check box.

Click OK twice to return to the file folder you have just encrypted.

You will now be presented with the Confirm Attribute Changes dialog box. Choose between Apply changes to this folder only or Apply changes to this folder, subfolders and files. The latter is selected by default.

Click OK.

Windows will start encrypting the file or the folder con tents. This will take some time as it depends on the amount of data it has to encrypt. The file or folder name will now be displayed in green, so you know the contents are protected. Adding new files into an encrypted folder is a simple drag-and-drop affair. The contents will only be accessible when you login to Windows with your user name and password. Alternatively, you can use the free VeraCrypt tool ­ available for Windows, Mac OS X and Linux platforms ­ from veracrypt.codeplex.com.

For a step-by-step guide on how to use the tool, go to veracrypt.codeplex.comdocumentation and click on Beginner's Tutorial.Note: Before your encrypt something important, do a trial run of this tool with dummy files. This will help you understand the process better. If you're going to use this tool with official files, please seek the help of your office system administrator. That said, the documentation for VeraCrypt ­ complete with screenshots ­ is extensive, and very simple to follow.

Also, after adding files to an encrypted VeraCrypt volume, the original unencrypted files should be moved to an external hard drive or deleted altogether. When you use Windows EFS to protect your files, an “encryption certificate“ and a key will be created in the system. You should save a copy of these credentials in case you have to reinstall Windows.To know how, visit: windows.microsoft.comen-inwindowsback-up-efs-certificate

Source | Time of India | 21 November 2015

Li-fi: Internet that's 100 times faster than Wi-Fi

Doug Bolton





Transmits Data @1GBps Via Visible Light, But It Can't Pass Through Walls

A new type of wireless in ternet technology has be en developed that could provide a connection 100 times aster than traditional Wi-fi.The tech is called Li-fi, and was tested by an Estonian start up called Velmenni. Li-fi is ca pable of sending data at speeds of up to 1GBps, around 100 times aster than most Wi-fi connec ions. At speeds like this, al bums, high-definition films and even video games could be downloaded in seconds.
The speed is down to the way n which it transmits data -by using Visible Light Communi cation (VLC), data is sent betwe en networks by LED lights tha flicker incredibly fast. Howe ver, the technology has one ma jor limitation -because it reli es on visible light to work, it can't pass through walls.
However, this makes the net work much more secure. The dramatically increased speeds make it a big improvement on current technology for some applications as well.
Professor Harald Haas, from the University of Edinburgh pioneered the technology and coined the term Li-fi in 2011, but this is the first time it's been used in a `real world' setting. De epak Solanki, CEO of Velmen ni, said the technology could be rolled out to consumers within the next three to four years. However, due to Li-fi's limi tations, it would be likely to run in parallel with existing technology to increase a network's speed and efficiency . However, if the infastructure catches up, Lifi could become much more widely used, especially if it's transmitted through our lightbulbs.
As Haas said, “All we need to do is fit a small microchip to every potential illumination device and this would then combine two basic functionalities: illumination and wireless data transmission.“ “In the future we will not only have 14 billion light bulbs, we may have 14 billion Li-fis for a cleaner, greener and brighter future,“ he said.

Source: Times of India, 27-11-2015