Blog dedicado a la formación en todos sus ámbitos: presencial, online, a distancia
Hola:
Una infografía con 10 formas en las que los restaurantes usan Redes Sociales.
Un saludo
10 formas en las que los restaurantes usan Redes Sociales
Hola:
Una infografía sobre el móvil es la nueva estrella de los medios digitales.
Un saludo
You will find more statistics at Statista
Hola:
Una infografía que nos dice que el móvil representa más del 50% de los ingresos de FaceBook.
Un saludo
You will find more statistics at Statista
One pulse-infused product has already hit mainstream store shelves: some varieties of
Triscuit’s new rice-based crackers use red beans to increase the snacks’ protein and fiber, and to polish its health halo a little bit. Most Americans are at least a little health-conscious, but not so conscious that we’re going to do anything crazy like not eat Triscuits.
Or pasta. Americans just can’t eat enough protein, but if we can get it in the form of chickpea-infused spaghetti, that’s what we’re going to do. Barilla has put these on mainstream store shelves, too: the Barilla Plus line contains a blend of pulse flours meant to add more protein.
The powders can make a logical substitute for wheat flour and even eggs in food products. General Mills is using yellow pea protein in a variety of Larabar, and the
The biggest issue in using these products is texture and freshness. Using pulses reduces the shelf life on some products, and also can make them, well, kind of dry.
You Will Eat Your Peas Now as Big Food Binges on Protein [Bloomberg News]
The Wall Street Journal reports that Amazon has quietly launched a pilot program working in the shadow of the vacant husk of a stadium that is Candlestick Park, using its own trucks and contracted drivers to make deliveries in the area.
Amazon has warehouses all around the country, but even when it’s delivering items down the street from one of its facilities, it has been paying others to do the work for them.
Operating its own to-the-home courier service could not only save it money on skyrocketing shipping costs, but also allow Amazon to offer same-day delivery of some items in certain areas. Of course, that will all depend on whether or not the local warehouse stocks an ordered item.
Amazon shoppers in the San Francisco area can apparently tell if their package is coming via the new service because the tracking info on Amazon.com will not link to an outside service and uses a different coding system than what you’d see from UPS or FedEx. The Journal reports that Amazon expects to expand this test to L.A. and NYC.
Amazon recently patented a system that would predict ordering behaviors of customers around the country, allowing the company to pre-ship items to distribution centers in order to more efficiently meet demand.
This last-mile type of courier service would seem to fit right into that system, employing FedEx, UPS, et al, to move large, bulk shipments around between distribution centers, and then employing its own service to make that delivery to the home.
Today’s launch of Prime Pantry also fits into this improved shipping model, but trying to minimize the packaging and tracking needed to deliver multiple items to one address.
Such a service would obviously mean fewer packages to deliver for UPS, FedEx, and USPS though presumably these would all still be used to make deliveries outside of areas immediately serviced by warehouses.
The Journal points out that Amazon’s test of its own delivery service in the U.K. hasn’t exactly gone swimmingly, with customers going online to gripe about missed, late or inaccurate deliveries. And one consumer in San Francisco who now receives packages delivered by Amazon says two recent orders have repeatedly missed their delivery deadlines.
“After the first time, I asked them not to ship me anything using that service, but they did it again anyway” said the customer. “I don’t want to be Amazon’s test market for their new shipping idea—that’s not what I am paying for.”
The Andy Warhol Museum now has the recovered art, a product of a partnership between Warhol and Commodore Amiga, after an artist happened to watch an old YouTube clip showing Warhol using the computer to create a portrait of Debbie Harry, reports The Verge.
In the video from 1985 at the launch of the Commodore Amiga, Warhol sits down and sets about tweaking an image of Harry. That piece wasn’t lost, however, and had been kept at Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh. The rest of his computer works weren’t so lucky, sitting on floppy disks for decades.
When a new media artist saw the clip, he got in touch with a curator at the Carnegie Museum of Art and they set out to get permission from the Warhol Museum’s chief archivist to search for files on Warhol’s disks.
They found a bonanza of doodles and experiments, including a sketchily done recreation of the famous Campbell’s soup can, reimagined in a MS Paint kind of way.
“Warhol saw no limits to his art practice,” said the director of the Warhol Museum. “These computer generated images underscore his spirit of experimentation and his willingness to embrace new media.”
Andy Warhol’s Amiga computer art found 30 years later [The Verge]
Depending on which cloud e-mail service or desktop client that an individual uses, it’s possible that customers overlooked the message entirely. Over on the Fitbit forums, some users reported that they received the message, but their computers flagged it as possible spam. The domain name on the message’s return address, Expertproductinquiry.com, belongs to Stericycle, a well-respected company in product recalls. (They’re the company handling the Gree dehumidifier recall.) That domain name leads to a generic front page for servers running the Microsoft Server operating system. The message is signed “Fitbit,” and doesn’t mention Stericycle anywhere.
Many systems flagged this message as suspicious because it had an attached Microsoft Word document: that’s a time-honored way to send dangerous macros and other badness through e-mail.
From: NoReply@expertproductinquiry.com (NoReply@expertproductinquiry.com)
Subject: Product Recall
Sent: March-20-14 7:36:18 PMDear Customer,
This e-mail is being sent to you because you are a registered user of
the Fitbit Force Activity-Tracking Wristband, which is being
voluntarily recalled by Fitbit, Inc. in cooperation with the U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission. Users can develop allergic
reactions to the stainless steel casing, materials used in the strap,
or adhesives used to assemble the product, resulting in redness,
rashes or blistering. Consumers should stop using the Fitbit Force
Activity-Tracking Wristband and return the product to Fitbit for a
full refund. Please open the attached document for the official press
release. For additional information regarding this product recall,
click here.Sincerely,
Fitbit, Inc.
Company representatives on the forums say that this message was part of the company’s recall plan put together with the help of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. All registered Force users as of late February of 2014 received the message… but how many people assumed it was a phishing attempt instead of a legitimate communication from the company?
No recall announcement plan is perfect. That’s impossible. It just seems to us that there must be a better way to do this when a product, in order to operate correctly, has to be associated with a working e-mail address and must be connected to the Internet every few days. We just don’t want to see unknowing customers hurt when they buy a Force from a third party who is either ignorant of or disingenuous about the recall.
Amazon officially launched the grocery service on Wednesday. Sure, consumers have long been able to purchase items like toilet paper, cleaning supplies and certain other household goods from Amazon, but the new service allows for a wider range of products such as pasta sauce and pop.
Consumerist first reported that Amazon was tossing around the idea of Prime Pantry back in December and the officially launched service appears to operate much like it was first described.
Prime members can shop from more than 2,000 products to fill a four-cubic foot box with up to 45 pounds of goods. As items are ordered a virtual Prime Pantry box is filled to track available space.
The package can then be shipped for $5.99 plus the cost of the items. While delivery time may vary, consumers can expect to receive their packages in 1 to 4 business days, the Wall Street Journal reports.
At first glance the products seem to be in line with those found at grocery stores. A 24-pack of Arrowhead Spring Water cost $3.98, while a can of Chicken of the Sea Tuna is prices at $0.84.
Prime Pantry is just one product Amazon has launched in attempts to make grocery shopping on Amazon a thing.
Earlier this month, the company unveiled Amazon Dash, a device that consumers can talk into or use to scan groceries and other household items to add the products to their grocery list. However, that list is only good for AmazonFresh, which is only being tested in Southern California, San Francisco and Seattle.
Amazon Prime ‘Pantry’ Service Seeks to Slim Down Bulk Ordering [Wall Street Journal]
“There has been a great deal of misinformation that has recently surfaced regarding the draft Open Internet Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,” writes Wheeler, who has previously held consumer-loathing gigs as the CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association and president of the National Cable Television Association. “The Notice does not change the underlying goals of transparency, no blocking of lawful content, and no unreasonable discrimination among users established by the 2010 Rule.”
Sigh.
It’s true that the proposal does introduce transparency to the process and it does prohibit the outright blocking of content, but it’s the “no unreasonable discrimination” part that Wheeler is hoping to slip past the public.
He is trying to convince consumers of this illusory notion that ISPs will continue innovating and improving delivery speeds for everybody, but that there will be rare circumstances in which a content provider will pay for extra-special treatment.
But what incentive would ISPs have to make quality connections available to market-wide when there is money to be made in holding end-users as hostages to demand higher fees?
Imagine this scenario:
Cable Company X has a monopoly on wired broadband in Town City, USA. StreamVideoNowPixster Inc (SVNPI) is a streaming video company that wants to reach the residents of Town City.
Under the old neutrality rules, Cable Company X could not degrade or promote content from SVNPI.
Company X’s improvements to its network apply to all content, regardless of the source.
Introduce the fast lane option to the equation. Cable Company X is now allowed to charge content companies for faster, improved delivery to the residents of Town City.
Company X could conceivably continue to improve its network and make most of this upgraded network available to everyone, but then only a very small number of content companies would need to pay for access to the fast lane. A company like SVNPI might decide it is perfectly fine with the existing network, so long as it continues to be upgraded and maintained. So SVNPI doesn’t pay for fast lane access.
Wanting more money from content companies, Company X allows its standard network to stay exactly as it is, while making substantial improvements to the network and offering those only to fast lane customers. SVNPI realizes this and sees that it will have no choice but to ante up and pay for fast lane connection. If it doesn’t, it won’t be able to compete with its deep-pocketed competition at FlixNet.
And even if SVNPI tries to tell the residents of Town City about Company X’s questionable behavior, it’s not like these residents have another choice for broadband service (unless they live in New Jersey, where regulators think super-expensive wireless broadband counts as a viable option).
We’ve already seen this sort of passive-aggressive hostage-taking happen with Netflix customers in the last year. Rather than open up more connections to ease bottlenecking of Netflix downstream traffic, Comcast, Verizon and AT&T each decided to maintain the status quo on their peering connections to Netflix’s bandwidth providers, resulting in those customers seeing cripplingly slow and broken streams.
Why would you expect the ISPs to behave any differently if they are suddenly allowed to charge for priority access?
Wheeler says his proposal, which is still subject to a commission vote and the requisite public feedback period, will set a “high bar” for what is considered “commercially reasonable,” implying that fast lane deals will be subject to all manner of scrutiny to make sure they aren’t extortionate or anticompetitive, but he provides no concrete parameters for this supposedly high bar. Meanwhile, multiple news reports claim that the proposal sets no actual standards for evaluating fast lane deals and that these judgement calls will be made on a case-by-case basis.
“Approaching discrimination on a case-by-case basis creates less certainty than clear rules and disadvantages small businesses and entrepreneurs,” says Michael Weinberg of Public Knowledge.
“[I]nserting any sort of commercial relationship into delivering last mile web content — outside of what the end-consumer pays the ISP — is not network neutrality,” writes GigaOm’s Stacey Higginbotham. “So let’s stop calling it that.”
Our colleague Delara Derakhshani, policy counsel for Consumers Union, says the Wheeler proposal “doesn’t bode well for consumers” and that the “FCC appears to have abandoned the principle that all web sites and services should be treated equally on the Internet.”
“This move is likely to favor the companies with the deepest pockets and hurt the scrappy start-ups,” explains Derakhshani. “It could create a tiered Internet where consumers either pay more for content and speed, or get left behind with fewer choices.”
While Wheeler repeatedly points to the court ruling that gutted the original neutrality rules as providing a roadmap for his proposal, the court did nothing to suggest that fast lanes were the best viable resolution for consumers.
The reason the court struck down the old guidelines is because a stone-age FCC had originally classified ISPs as content companies rather than infrastructure companies. That lack of foresight meant that the FCC didn’t have the authority to impose the neutrality regulations as they were written.
Most advocates for net neutrality agree that the simplest and most direct solution to the neutrality issue would be to reclassify broadband as infrastructure, allowing it to reinstate the previous guidelines.
“It’s more than disappointing that the FCC is not embracing the best option for achieving net neutrality, which is reclassifying Internet service as a telecommunications service,” says Derakhshani.
Explains Weinberg: “The D.C. Circuit Court opinion made it clear that the only way to achieve net neutrality is to reclassify internet access as a telecommunications service.”
The full commission is scheduled to vote on Wheeler’s proposal on May 15, after which point it will accept feedback from the public. When that period begins, you can be sure we’ll tell you exactly how and where to file your opinion on the matter.
The bill passed with a 114-30 vote, reports the Burlington Free Press, and also makes it illegal for foods with GMOs to be labeled “all natural” or “natural.”
And while Maine and Connecticut have their own GMO labeling bills, those have clauses that makes them inactive until surrounding states pass similar rules. Vermont’s bill goes into effect July 1, 2016, reports NPR’s The Salt blog.
Proponents are excited and hopeful that the measure will inspire the rest of the country to follow suit.
“Our constituents have spoken. They feel it’s important to know what’s in their food,” said House Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Partridge, D-Windham.
On the other side of the coin, plenty of big names in the food industry are none too pleased, and as such, the state government has included a fund in the bill to deal with probably legal battles.
“I’ll be very surprised if we are not sued if the legislature goes ahead and enacts a mandatory GMO labeling statute,” state Attorney General Sorrell said before the bill passed. “A lot of people might not realize that this is arguably a free speech issue.”
The Grocery Manufacturers Association sounds like it might be just such a party to fight it, responding to the bill in a statement: “It sets the nation on a costly and misguided path toward a 50-state patchwork of GMO labeling policies that will do nothing to advance the safety of consumers.”
From here, it’ll just have to cross the desk of Gov. Peter Shumlin, who sounds like he’s on board to sign the bill.
“I am proud of Vermont for being the first state in the nation to ensure that Vermonters will know what is in their food. The Legislature has spoken loud and clear through its passage of this bill,” he said in a statement. “I wholeheartedly agree with them and look forward to signing this bill into law.”
GMO bill one step from law [Burlington Free Press]
Bracing For A Battle, Vermont Passes GMO Labeling Bill [The Salt]
