Friday, January 11, 2019

Hurricanes. Shootings. Fires. Time for an Editor’s Emergency Kit.



When news of natural disasters or man-made ones break in the U.S., Julie Bloom taps a variety of tools to communicate with reporters, edit stories and get them published.


As a deputy editor on the national desk, you oversee a lot of breaking news. What tech tools do you use to help?
Hurricanes. Shootings. Wildfires. Elections and earthquakes. I didn’t think anything could be as crazy as the fall of 2017 in this country, but 2018 came pretty close.
I primarily oversee California and parts of the West, but also handle a lot of our coverage of major breaking news. With my colleagues on the desk and our boss, Marc Lacey, the national editor, we’ve developed a tool kit of sorts to handle these stories that are fast-moving and intense.

I feel like each day is a little like being caught in a batter’s box without knowing when or where the balls are coming from, and that can be both exhilarating and exhausting. Technology certainly helps.
My phone is pretty much everything. It’s kind of its own command center, and I can do almost everything on it except edit. For stories, I still need my laptop. Most of the reporters know that if they get a call from me at an odd hour, it usually means they’re on their way to something awful, but the reason we can do what we do is that they are total pros. Nobody ever just hangs up and goes back to sleep.

In these cases, our job is to help them produce the best journalism possible in difficult situations and make sure they stay safe, too. I’m in awe of the reporters on National who are relentless and often put themselves in danger while covering tough stories with compassion. Unfortunately, we’ve done enough of them now that we kind of know what to do.
Recently, we had a ton of breaking news out of California, where the majority of my reporters are based. The combination of the shooting in Thousand Oaks and the wildfires was a good example of having to be really nimble. One of our California reporters, Jenny Medina, called me in what was the middle of her night to say she and a bunch of F.B.I. agents who were in Thousand Oaks after the shooting had been forced to evacuate their hotel because of the fires. You can never predict what’s next, so you just have to be ready to switch gears and work with what you have.
In breaking news, I rely on Twitter and Dataminr, which monitors Twitter for newsworthy patterns, to keep track of developments. We’re also paying attention to police scanners, local television and all forms of social media and trying to break and confirm our own scoops, too. The trick is being careful and fast at the same time. A lot of bad information gets out in the immediate aftermath, and you never want to get it wrong.

In the middle of any given story, reporters and I communicate using text messages, Slack, Signal, Gchat and phone calls. We often spin off a Slack channel just for one event and have an email set up for breaking news that teams of reporters feed to. Those are split up into a bunch of different Google docs that we keep building out simultaneously for, say, a profile or a piece just on weapons or victims. Stories are updated dozens of times. We’re also watching search trends and adjusting headlines to make sure we’re showing up first. On a big, big story we’ll also send out multiple alerts with new developments.




"My phone is pretty much everything," Ms. Bloom said. "It’s kind of its own command center."




"My phone is pretty much everything," Ms. Bloom said. "It’s kind of its own command center."
Many of your reporters are based on the West Coast, while you are stationed in New York. How do you keep in touch with them and work with them on stories?
Even though it’s a different time zone, we’re still covering the news no matter when and where it happens. My reporters are all early risers, or they’re becoming ones. We have regular calls where we brainstorm ideas, but most editing is a constant back and forth over email, Gchat and text, and that seems to work well.
We’re fortunate because The Times has bureaus all over the place, so sometimes we hand off to Hong Kong or London and the editors there can help keep stories going.
Your contributors sometimes report stories from odd situations, like natural disasters. What tools do they use, and how do they get stories to you expediently?
For stories like wildfires or hurricanes, reporters often take satellite phones with them to make sure they can keep in contact when cell communication is down. But it doesn’t always work. During the recent wildfires, one reporter, Julie Turkewitz, was one of the first to enter the fire zone in Paradise, Calif., with a team of forensic experts searching for remains, and we lost contact with her for a few hours right on deadline. Thankfully, she surfaced just in time.
Sometimes good old dictation is the best means of getting scenes and reporting in real time. Reporters are also well versed in filing from their cars, Waffle Houses or the side of the road. We’ve had a few instances in hurricanes when reporters have had to abandon their rental cars because they were flooding and get to safety and they still managed to file.

You are a Los Angeles native. In your view, how has tech changed California?
I grew up in the Los Angeles area and went to school at Berkeley and keep close ties to both parts of the state, and I go back a lot to see family. California is an endlessly exciting place for The Times to cover: It’s the world’s fifth-largest economy, at the forefront of all sorts of change, extremely complex and a hotbed of contradictions. I like to think of it more as its own country. Technology is obviously a big part of all of that, and we’re a long way from when I was a teenager on AOL Messenger.
When you’re not at work, what tech product do you use a lot?
I’m pretty low-tech in my nonwork life — or I try to be. When you’re responsible for news, it’s hard to let go. I’ve tried everything from burying my phone under my kitchen sink to deleting certain apps on the weekend, but at a certain point you just relent and accept.
I think social media is a mostly necessary evil and try to avoid it when I’m not working, but I still haven’t quit Instagram. Besides friends and family, I follow a lot of dancers and ballet companies — remnants from a former life — and museums, chefs and fashion designers. It’s good to be reminded that there are people out there creating beautiful things, too.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Queen, Ally and the Alchemy of Musical Stardom on the Big Screen


I was waiting for a subway last month in Mexico City when I figured out what’s wrong with the Queen movie. I mean, I knew what was wrong. “Bohemian Rhapsody” is scared of tapping into the imagination that made the band so innovative and powerfully, addictively strange. But that’s not what hit me waiting for the subway.
The platform entertainment system was playing a concert video of “Another One Bites the Dust.” I don’t know what year the clip was from or what city Queen was in. I just know that the lighting is warm, the groove is skintight (you could feel it on the platform), and that Freddie Mercury is wearing — is packed into — white short-shorts and almost nothing else. No shoes, no shirt yet all service. The towel he’s whipping around gets an almost immediate, theatrical toss into the crowd. The red wristband and red bandanna tied round his neck bring out the red in his Montreal Canadiens trucker’s cap.

The real Freddie Mercury, mesmerizing French fans in 1984.

The real Freddie Mercury, mesmerizing French fans in 1984.
Mercury does all his Mercurial moves — the side gallop, the chug-a-lug, the duck strut, the steed swipe, the rewind, the vroom-vroom, the Wimbledon Final frozen pirouette, the one where he kind of dries his tushy with the microphone stand in a full march. And he does them while belting out this uppercut of a song (with some shockingly forceful assistance from the drummer Roger Taylor). Commuters, tourists, kids: we looked up at this thing, mesmerized, in jeopardy of missing a train. That’s right about when I figured out what was wrong with the Queen movie: There’s nothing in it remotely like this.
“Bohemian Rhapsody” plods, explains, obscures, speculates and flattens. It does not mesmerize. I mean, I wouldn’t miss a train for this. We learn how “We Will Rock You” allegedly sprang from a fit of personal protestation. But it’s news we can’t use. The movie won’t stop telling us things — about the music business and the songs, about Mercury’s tortured sex life. And it fails to show you anything close to what that clip on the subway platforms makes you feel: sweaty.

The musical biography has an impossibly high degree of alchemical difficulty. One performer has to become a totally different performer, and not any performer, just this one star the whole world knows, and it has to be done in a way that makes you believe you’re seeing either the impersonated star or something quintessential about them. Val Kilmer made you believe you were seeing something vitally true about Jim Morrison. Joaquin Phoenix did the same with Johnny Cash. And Jamie Foxx became Ray Charles. Angela Bassett convinced you that if you were seeing if not Tina Turner, then Turner’s indestructibility; and Marion Cotillard, the brittle incandescence of Edith Piaf.
For my money, one of the triumphs of this type of acting is Chadwick Boseman’s James Brown in “Get On Up.” Boseman pumps Brown full of edginess and spite while having to reconstruct Brown as a stage specimen, and part of that reconstruction involves learning to lip sync to Brown. You sense that you’re watching an actor who’s done more than homework. He’s written himself a little dissertation. It’s not an impression of Brown. It’s an interpolation.

Some movies pivot and omit the musical performance altogether. That’s the approach Todd Haynes applied to Bob Dylan in “I’m Not There” and John Ridley took in having Andre 3000 play Jimi Hendrix in “Jimi: All Is by My Side.” But the alchemy is a reason to dislike the genre. It’s hard to get the proportions right. It takes some work in, say, “Cadillac Records” to figure out where BeyoncĂ© ends and Etta James is supposed to begin.
Rami Malek has a different challenge in “Bohemian Rhapsody.” He’s not a superstar playing another superstar. He just has to become the superstar Freddie Mercury was. Just. And yet because the movie is mostly scenes of recording sessions, squabbling and self-pity, Mercury’s stardom is made beside the point — it’s assumed — so Malek gets to play a charismatic sufferer, -quipster and, eventually, proud brown gay man. It’s just that this version of Mercury isn’t terribly exciting without the reward of seeing him vroom-vroom in short-shorts. The movie rides the roller coaster of biographical clichĂ©. What’s missing are musical numbers that showcase his showmanship and eternal capacity for self-delight.
This means more time watching Malek struggle with dental effects meant to bring his mouth into more realistic alignment with Mercury’s. Maybe Malek has done the best anyone could with the teeth. But they wind up bringing something vampiric out of Mercury that I don’t know was ever there. Either way, the alchemy is off.



In “A Star Is Born,” Lady Gaga (with Bradley Cooper) shows a lovely hesitance.

In “A Star Is Born,” Lady Gaga (with Bradley Cooper) shows a lovely hesitance.
WE’RE IN A HAPPY MOMENT for musical-movie excitement. “Mary Poppins” has returned with new songs. And despite that lie of a title, “The Greatest Showman” is the most impressive phenomenon nobody saw coming or took seriously once it came. “Bohemian Rhapsody” is now the musical biopic’s biggest hit. We can have the argument later about the difference between a classical movie musical and a movie where people get on stage and do music, but you could also add to the mix this latest incarnation of “A Star Is Born,” which was a smash too.
It’s the story of how a waitress became a Grammy winner. And because the tale is essentially a fantasy — of love, fame and ruin; biography as mythology — its casting is the inverse of the rock bio. A musician does the acting. In Bradley Cooper’s version, the musician is Lady Gaga. She starts off as Ally the restaurant grunt. But when Cooper’s beloved alt-country pill guzzler sees her belt “La Vie en Rose” in a drag parlor, he hauls her into stardom, which Gaga knows well.
But the surprise of her acting comes in the first hour when the movie is closer to earth and requires her to be more like you and me — daughter, employee, listener. There’s a lovely hesitance to her here, not in the camera-shy way singers tend to get when it’s time to act. Reluctance is a performance strategy for her in this movie. Again, she’s like you and me, she can’t believe Bradley Cooper’s happening to her, either. Some of what’s great about the first hour is how it gets you thinking about the kind of career Gaga could have in movies they haven’t made in, like, 30 years.

Lady Gaga with Andrew Dice Clay as her father in the movie.

Lady Gaga with Andrew Dice Clay as her father in the movie.
The scenes at home with Ally, her chauffeur father and his fellow drivers are loud, funny and warm in a way that reminded me of “Moonstruck.” And some of the pleasure I had watching Gaga in them is how she reminded me of another singer who acts: Cher. A friend points out that she could have Cher’s career if the movies were still interested in normal people. I, at least, would love to see Gaga in a “Mask” or a “Suspect.”
She and Malek are both near the top of the heap for Oscar nominations. And she’s got an alchemical advantage over Malek’s Freddie Mercury. When Ally’s career takes off, Gaga winds up playing a pop star not unlike herself. And you realize she has the opposite problem that Malek does. You’re less interested in her as a singer — but only because we’ve seen her do huge, stadium-size razzle-dazzle before. And yet she’s indifferent to playing the fame stuff. It doesn’t seem to interest Ally or Gaga. If the movie loses Ally a bit in the second half, Gaga never appears lost. She’s giving a serious, considered, committed performance of a person she seems to know. Malek’s commitment is to a movie committed in the wrong proportions. It doesn’t know who it wants Freddie Mercury to be.
“Bohemian Rhapsody” doesn’t fixate on the showmanship until the finale, which restages their electric, legendary Live-Aid performance at Wembly Stadium and passes for showstopping. Yet you exit hungry for a movie that gets closer to the bottom of a man who renamed himself after both an element and a planet. If someone dares take another crack (and someone really should), I know the perfect Freddie. Her first name is Lady. And her last name comes straight from a Queen song.

Wednesday, January 9, 2019

CES 2019: It’s the Year of Virtual Assistants and 5G



A visual tour of the world’s most important tech conference offers a window into the year’s trends, including next-generation wireless networks and the invasion of A.I.

LAS VEGAS — The show must go on.
That sentiment couldn’t have been stronger this week at CES, the largest consumer electronics convention in the country. The conference, which brought more than 180,000 people to Las Vegas, was a reminder of what the tech industry is best at: being optimistic about itself.


Who cares about the abysmal stock market and growing fears that we are sliding into a recession? Check out these virtual-reality headsets, self-driving cars and big-screen TVs.
Filippo Yacob, a tech entrepreneur who attended, was blasĂ© about the state of the market. “The speed of progress and innovation happens at such a rapid pace that it’s not like it pulses with the stock market,” said Mr. Yacob, whose company Primo Toys makes tech products for children. “It’s more like a bullet train.”

This year’s event was also slightly larger than the last, with more than 4,500 exhibitors sprawled across 2.7 million square feet. The conference offered a peek at the year’s hottest tech trends, including artificially intelligent virtual assistants, next-generation wireless networks and connected cars.

And companies unveiled thousands of products. Google and Amazon showed car accessories, alarm clocks and speakers that can be controlled with their virtual assistants by speaking commands like “Hey, Google, what’s the weather today?” or “Alexa, what’s my sports update?”

Wireless carriers and chip makers highlighted 5G, the next-generation cellular network arriving this year in a small number of cities with data speeds so zippy that devices can download an entire movie in seconds.





The most surprising news came when a host of tech companies announced they were working with Apple to bring some of the company’s content and virtual assistant capabilities to their devices.
Vizio, the TV maker, said its newer TVs would work with AirPlay, an Apple software feature for streaming video and audio content from an iPhone or Mac to a television screen. People will be able to speak to Siri on their iPhones to play content they had purchased from iTunes on the Vizio TVs. Samsung, Sony and LG announced similar partnerships with Apple.In the past, AirPlay and iTunes videos were mostly tied to Apple-made hardware like the Apple TV set-top box. Their expansion to third parties underlines Apple’s ambition to expand the revenue it generates from its internet content and services. That’s especially important now that sales of Apple’s cash cow, the iPhone, are slowing. This month, the company reduced its revenue expectations for the first time in 16 years.
The move is also notable because it illustrates an unusual willingness by Apple to open its technology to other companies, including competitors like Samsung.
In a statement provided by Samsung, Eddy Cue, Apple’s head of internet software and services, said that with the expansion of iTunes and AirPlay, “iPhone, iPad and Mac users have yet another way to enjoy all their favorite content on the biggest screen in their home.”

Front and center at CES was the battle between virtual assistants — namely Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant. Google erected an enormous outdoor booth to show off the multitude of devices that now work with Assistant, including smart watches, speakers and displays. The company said a billion devices now work with its assistant, up from 400 million last year. Google wants to make the Assistant the focal point of a consumer’s life: in the home, in the car and on mobile devices.
“When I walk down the aisle at Home Depot, will all the devices I might buy work with the Assistant?” Nick Fox, a Google executive who oversees Assistant, said of items like smoke detectors and thermostats. “The answer is yes.”
Amazon also had a large presence at the show. It filled a large conference room at the Venetian hotel with dozens of products that work with Alexa, including an Audi car, a motorcycle helmet and a stereo system.
The battle among virtual assistants is shaping up to be very different from past platform wars between tech companies because consumers will have more choices. Many of the smart gadgets at CES worked with multiple virtual assistants.
Aaron Emigh, chief executive of Brilliant, which makes smart home products that work with Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri, said it was critical for virtual assistants to work together, not against one another, because the smart home was already too complex, with products like light switches, thermostats and cameras coming from different brands.
“The more technology and the more different vendors that get put in your home, the more important that it all works together,” he said.

Car manufacturers like Mercedes-Benz and BMW showed off concepts of autonomous vehicles powered by artificial intelligence and 5G wireless connections. But consumers won’t be able to buy self-driving vehicles from a dealership anytime soon, in part because companies still need much more data on how people drive cars. Smarter cars with features like built-in voice assistants to help people use maps, play music or get a sports update without taking their eyes off the road are available now, however.
If the economy does cool off, sales of cutting-edge gadgets will drop. Fast. But that didn’t faze people here. None of the CES attendees I spoke to expressed concern.
Matt Strauss, who oversees Comcast’s Xfinity internet and cable service, was especially bullish about the year ahead. He said just about everything announced at CES required an internet connection, so that’s the last thing that people would cut off.
“It’s become like oxygen,” he said.

Devices That Will Invade Your Life in 2019 (and What’s Overhyped)



A.I. that responds to your voice. Next-generation wireless networks. If this year’s biggest consumer technology trends have a familiar ring, there’s a reason for that.

Imagine a future where you are never truly alone. Even when your spouse is on a business trip or your children are away at summer camp, you will always have someone (or something) to talk to. In the morning, you could ask the microwave to heat up a bowl of oatmeal. In your car, you could tell your stereo to put on some ’90s music. And when you walk into the office, you could ask your smartphone, “What’s on my calendar today?”
This is increasingly the world the tech industry is building with a bloating portfolio of devices that can react to voice commands — and that the companies will be pitching to you even more in 2019.
The future will be on display next week at CES, a consumer electronics trade show in Las Vegas that serves as a window into the year’s hottest tech trends. Artificially intelligent virtual assistants will take center stage as the most important tech topic, with companies big and small expected to showcase voice-controlled devices like robot vacuums, alarm clocks, refrigerators and car accessories. Most of these products will be powered by Amazon’s Alexa or Google’s Assistant, the two most popular artificially intelligent assistants, industry insiders said.
“A.I. will pervade the show,” said Gary Shapiro, chief executive of the Consumer Technology Association, which owns CES. 

If this all sounds like a repeat of last year, that’s because much of it is. Artificial intelligence was 2018’s hottest tech trend, too. In other words, the tech industry is in a state of iteration rather than making leaps and bounds with something totally new.
Other tech trends that are progressing include the debut this year of fifth-generation cellular networks, known as 5G, which will significantly quicken mobile internet speeds. Cybersecurity products for home networks are also proliferating, an important safeguard now that consumers own so many devices that can connect to the internet.

But as is often the case, there will also be plenty of talk in the coming week about overly optimistic tech that you would do best to sidestep for now. That’s because some of the most hyped technologies — especially self-driving cars — are so far from reality that you won’t see them in stores or dealerships anytime soon.
Here’s what to watch, and what to avoid.
Last year, Amazon introduced a microwave powered by its Alexa virtual assistant.
In 2015, Amazon birthed the Echo, the artificially intelligent speaker featuring the virtual assistant known as Alexa. A year later, Google responded with Home, its smart speaker powered by Google’s own digital companion, called Assistant.
Since then, in a bid to become your go-to digital companion, the two tech giants have teamed up with makers of devices like thermostats, doorbells, light bulbs and car accessories to add their virtual assistants to them.

Google is expected to be even more aggressive this year with its Assistant. The company will triple the size of its presence at CES this year, suggesting that it is likely to unveil a large array of products that work with Assistant.
“We’re really leaning into the Assistant as the best way to get things done, helping you for lots of things as you go about your day,” said Nick Fox, a Google executive who oversees Assistant.
Amazon said it would also showcase a wide range of technologies that work with Alexa next week, as part of a vision it calls Alexa Everywhere. The company’s goal is to expand the reach of its virtual assistant into every part of people’s lives, including the kitchen, the living room, the office and the car.
For you and me, here’s a cautionary note: Virtual assistants are still in their infancy and have many shortcomings. We have to speak a very specific command to trigger a virtual assistant to control a device, like setting the temperature on a thermostat or turning on a lamp. Those unfamiliar with the lingo may find the devices even more difficult to use than pressing a button inside an app.
“We still have to learn their language, and they have not learned our language,” said Frank Gillett, a tech analyst for Forrester, a technology research company.
Lost in the hype about virtual assistants is whether people truly want an omnipresent companion involved in their everyday tasks. Owners of smart speakers mostly summoned digital assistants for basic functions like listening to music, checking the weather and setting a timer, according to research by Nielsen last year.
Plenty of people install antivirus software on their computers. But what about all the other devices that can be connected to the internet, like smart watches, phones, televisions and speakers? 

In an era of smart things, the Wi-Fi router is becoming a bigger target for hackers, so expect a flood of new equipment and software that offer protection by improving your network security.
For a sense of what to expect, consider Eero Plus, a subscription service that Eero, a maker of Wi-Fi equipment, released last year. Eero Plus includes protection against viruses and malware for all the devices connected to its Wi-Fi network. Last year, NetGear released NetGear Armor, a similar security service.
More should follow this year — beginning next week at CES, where Scalys, a networking company, plans to introduce TrustBox, a router with built-in security features.

Carriers like Verizon and AT&T said new network technology would deliver data at incredible speeds.
Carriers like Verizon and AT&T said new network technology would deliver data at incredible speeds.
This year, the wireless industry will begin a big upgrade to its infrastructure. Phone carriers like AT&T and Verizon Wireless say the 5G technology will deliver data at incredibly fast speeds, allowing people to download entire movies in a few seconds.
In addition to increasing smartphone speeds, 5G will be important for other types of devices, like robots, self-driving cars, drones and security cameras. The technology is expected to greatly reduce latency, or the time it takes for devices to communicate with one another.
But don’t get too excited. Carriers say the new network technology will be deployed this year in only a few cities in the United States, and in some parts of Britain, Germany, Switzerland, China, South Korea and Australia.
And not many smartphones will be compatible with 5G initially. Some Chinese handset makers and Samsung Electronics have said they will release their first 5G smartphones this year. Apple is not expected to release a 5G-compatible iPhone until 2020.

“For the early adopters with deep pockets, that’s great,” Mr. Gillett said. “For the rest of us, big whoop.”
Virtual reality and self-driving cars have been talked about a lot in recent years, and they will still be talked about this year. But these two technologies are still nascent or premature.
Over the last two years, tech companies like Facebook’s Oculus, HTC, Google and Samsung have flooded the market with virtual reality headsets and plenty of software and games. Yet people have not exactly embraced the products.
“The industry has been plagued by high-cost hardware, motion sickness, a dearth of compelling content and a general lack of consumer interest,” said Victoria Petrock, an analyst for the research firm eMarketer, in a recent post.
Self-driving cars are also still many years from becoming mainstream. Even though some companies have permits to test autonomous cars in California, Arizona and elsewhere, several of the leaders in the technology — such as Alphabet’s Waymo — have refrained from committing to a release date for self-driving vehicles.
“There’s going to be a lot of noise about automotive technology, but nothing distinct or specific,” Mr. Gillett said.

Tuesday, January 8, 2019

How to Find the Video Games of Your Youth



The classics can take you back in time — and are probably easier to recapture than you think.

Video games hit their 60th birthday in October, if you start counting (as many do) with Tennis for Two, a rudimentary Pong ancestor cobbled together by the physicist William A. Higinbotham at Long Island’s Brookhaven National Laboratory. Games have evolved a lot since then, of course, becoming far more complicated and visual, as well as multiplayer.
Yet sometimes you just want to play an old favorite. Why seek out an ancient game with rudimentary graphics and only basic actions? For some, it’s pure nostalgia, like reading a beloved picture book again. For others, old games are a way to share a link to their childhood with a child of their own.
Video game companies have caught on to the urge. Nintendo sells throwback consoles preloaded with its vintage games, as do Atari, Sony and others. 

But if you don’t want to invest in new hardware, here are ways to relive your gaming past and see if you still have the moves.

Many developers have moved the original game code to app stores for tablets and smartphones. For example, you can play Sega’s Sonic the Hedgehog on an Android or iOS device, although you may have to shell out a few bucks to play ad-free or advance to higher levels.
In addition, some game companies with extensive archives have versions of old games that run on their latest hardware. Dragon Ball Z: Super Butoden and Omega Fighter, for example, are on sale for less than $10 on the Nintendo Switch, the company’s hybrid handheld-console system.

Gamers used to more sophisticated play and richer graphics can also find favorite old role-playing games, first-person shooters and other fare on dedicated online gaming platforms like Steam and GOG Galaxy.
Steam has a larger library (and, for $20, access to the Atari Vault of 100 golden-age classics). But both platforms offer games that can be played on Windows and Mac computers. Not all games work on every desktop system and prices vary, but you can find 1990s favorites like Baldur’s Gate for $20, Star Wars: X-Wing for $10 or 2003’s EVE Online for free.

The Internet Archive's Software collection offers thousands of old video games.

The Internet Archive's Software collection offers thousands of old video games.
If you have a day to spare, point your computer’s browser to Archive.org, home of the Internet Archive. Click the Software icon for thousands of old games, many of which have been adapted to play right in the browser with a keyboard or a gamepad. 

The responsiveness can be balky and some games lack sound, but the graphics are sure to reboot memories. Read the game page’s comments for tips (like hitting the tab key to remap the controls) or glance through online instructions posted by enthusiasts.
Highlights include The Internet Arcade (showcasing coin-operated classics like Defender and Q*bert) and the Console Living Room, with more than 6,300 games from several home systems — like the Atari 2600, Colecovision, the Sega Master System and the original Sony PlayStation. Libraries of Apple II and MS-DOS games have also been retrofitted for browser play.

The DOSBox emulator software runs old MS-DOS games on Windows, Mac and Linux systems. But beware: You need to remember how to use DOS commands.

The DOSBox emulator software runs old MS-DOS games on Windows, Mac and Linux systems. But beware: You need to remember how to use DOS commands.
If you’re the type who never throws old discs away, even if you don’t have a computer to play them on, you still might be able to play.
If you still have a Windows machine with a disc drive, installing and running the games in Compatibility Mode sometimes works. Using emulation software is an alternative.
There is a variety of emulation software, like the open-source DOSBox program for Windows, Mac and Linux, a popular option for getting old DOS games to run on modern hardware. DOSBox also works with many games downloaded from GOG.com.
But be careful. The web is full of “old games” sites offering downloads, and some are dodgy malware traps. The DOS Games Archives promises clean shareware, freeware and public-domain software. And tech-savvy Raspberry Pi owners can turn that $35 computer into a retro game console, limiting the reach of any PC malware. (The Wirecutter, a New York Times company that reviews and recommends products, has a detailed guide on turning the Pi into a game console.)
Pac-Man, first released into video arcades in 1980, is still one of the most recognized games around, even in the smartphone era.

Pac-Man, first released into video arcades in 1980, is still one of the most recognized games around, even in the smartphone era.
Fortnite and Minecraft may dominate the game world today, but for sheer persistence and a huge dose of 1980s nostalgia, you can still find the iconic arcade wonder Pac-Man on just about every hardware platform around.
The munching yellow head with the distinctive waka-waka-waka sound even got a fully playable Google Doodle in 2010 on its 30th anniversary. Amazon’s Alexa speaker now has a “choose your own adventure” audio version called Pac-Man Stories — proving, perhaps, that the classics find a new audience in every generation.



Sunday, January 6, 2019

Netflix Blocks Show in Saudi Arabia Critical of Saudi Prince


Netflix has blocked an episode of its show “Patriot Act With Hasan Minhaj” from streaming in Saudi Arabia after the Saudi government complained that the episode — which is critical of the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman — violated its cybercrime laws.
In the episode, first shown in October, Mr. Minhaj critiques the United States’ longstanding relationship with Saudi Arabia after the murder of the dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
“Now would be a good time to reassess our relationship with Saudi Arabia,” Mr. Minhaj said, “and I mean that as a Muslim and an American.”
After receiving a takedown request last month from the Saudi government’s Communications and Information Technology Commission, Netflix removed the episode from viewing in Saudi Arabia last week. The news was first reported by The Financial Times.

In a statement, Netflix defended its decision: “We strongly support artistic freedom worldwide and only removed this episode in Saudi Arabia after we had received a valid legal request — and to comply with local law.”
The episode remains available to Netflix customers elsewhere in the world, and it can also be seen by viewers in Saudi Arabia through the show’s YouTube channel, according to The Financial Times. YouTube did not immediately respond on Tuesday to an email asking whether it had received a complaint from the Saudi government.
The “Patriot Act” episode appears to be the only program that the Saudi government has asked Netflix to block there.
Mr. Minhaj has not commented publicly on the removal of the episode. But in an interview published in The Atlantic last month, Mr. Minhaj spoke of the fear he felt after creating it.
“There was a lot of discussion in my family about not doing it,” he said in the interview. “I’ve just come to personal and spiritual terms with what the repercussions are.”


Article 6 of the Saudi anti-cyber crime law, which was cited by the Saudi commission in its request to Netflix, prohibits the “production, preparation, transmission or storage of material impinging on public order, religious values, public morals and privacy” on the internet. Journalism advocates call it a powerful and all-encompassing instrument for the Saudi government to censor virtually any speech online.
The Committee to Project Journalists, which rates Saudi Arabia the third most censored country in the world, has documented the growing crackdown on journalists since the appointment last year of Prince Mohammed, who was first promoted as an agent of modernization and reform.
Under Prince Mohammed’s rule, “authorities have wielded state mechanisms ostensibly focused on terrorism to silence journalists,” according to a blog post published in September by the Committee to Project Journalists.
The Communications and Information Technology Commission did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
It is not unheard of for Western news organizations to have critical reports censored in authoritarian countries. But that action is often taken by local partners, and sometimes without notice.
In 2014, for example, a report about Pakistan’s relationship to Al Qaeda was deleted from thousands of print copies of the International New York Times in Pakistan — resulting in a blank spot on the front page — “without our knowledge or agreement,” a representative of The Times said at the time.

Saturday, January 5, 2019

How Mark Zuckerberg Became Too Big to Fail

 

Facebook has had a turbulent two years. But almost no one in tech thinks Mr. Zuckerberg, the social network’s chief executive, should step down from the company he built.

A few weeks ago, after Facebook revealed that tens of millions of its users’ accounts had been exposed in a security breach, I began asking people in and around the tech industry a simple question: Should Mark Zuckerberg still be running Facebook?
I’ll spare you the suspense. Just about everyone thought Mr. Zuckerberg was still the right man for the job, if not the only man for the job. This included people who currently work at Facebook, people who used to work at Facebook, financial analysts, venture capitalists, tech-skeptic activists, ardent critics of the company and its giddiest supporters.
The consensus went like this: Even if Mr. Zuckerberg — as Facebook’s founder, chief executive, chairman and most powerful shareholder — bore most of the responsibility for the company’s cataclysmic recent history, he alone possessed the stature to fix it.
More than one of his supporters told me it was bad faith to even broach the subject — that Mr. Zuckerberg’s indispensability was so plain that the only reason I might have to ask whether he should still run the company was the clicks I would get on this article. But even critics were not that excited about the idea of Mr. Zuckerberg’s removal. Barry Lynn, executive director of the Open Markets Institute, an organization that fights monopoly power, argued that Facebook’s problems grew out of its business model and the legal and regulatory vacuum in which it has operated — not the man who runs it.

“To be blunt, if we took Mark Zuckerberg out and we replaced him with Mahatma Gandhi, I don’t think the corporation would change in any significant way,” Mr. Lynn said.
That few can imagine a Facebook without Mr. Zuckerberg, 34, underscores how unaccountable our largest tech companies have become. Mr. Zuckerberg, thanks to his own drive and brilliance, has become one of the most powerful unelected people in the world. Like an errant oil company or sugar-pumping food company, Facebook makes decisions that create huge consequences for society — and he has profited handsomely from the chaos.

Yet because of Facebook’s ownership structure — in which Mr. Zuckerberg’s shares have 10 times the voting power of ordinary shares — he is omnipotent there, answering basically to no one.
This fits a pattern. Over the last two decades, the largest tech companies have created a system in which executives suffer few personal or financial consequences for their mistakes. Big tech has turned founders into fixtures — when their companies are working well, they get all the credit, and when their companies are doing badly, they are the only heroes who can fix them.
There’s another way to put this: For better or worse, Mr. Zuckerberg has become too big to fail.
In America, it’s not unusual for executives to escape punishment for how they steer their corporations (see Wall Street after the 2008 financial crisis). Still, when companies step in it badly, there are often at least calls for their leaders’ dismissal. The chief executives of Equifax and Target were pushed out after data breaches. The chief executive of Wells Fargo was ousted after a scandal involving sham accounts. 


Even in Silicon Valley, where company founders are revered as money-laying rainbow unicorns, there is some limit to corporate patience. In the 1980s, Apple fired Steve Jobs. Last year, Uber ousted Travis Kalanick, who was as closely aligned with his company’s culture as Mr. Zuckerberg is with his.
Facebook’s problems have not reached the level of lawlessness we saw at Uber, but they have been far more consequential. Besides the breach, Facebook has been implicated in a global breakdown of democracy, including its role as a vector for Russian disinformation during the 2016 American presidential election.
Investigators for the United Nations have said Facebook was instrumental to genocide in Myanmar; it has also been tied to violence in India, South Sudan and Sri Lanka. There have been privacy scandals (Cambridge Analytica most recently), advertising scandals (discriminatory ads, fishy metrics), multiple current federal inquiries, and an admission that using Facebook can be detrimental to your mental health.
Even though Mr. Zuckerberg has apologized and vowed again and again and again to fix Facebook, the company’s fixes often need fixing. In the last week, reporters showed that the company’s recent move to clamp down on political ads has not worked — Vice News bought Facebook ads falsely stating that they were “paid for” by Vice President Mike Pence and ISIS.
So given such failures, another question might be: Why haven’t any heads rolled at Facebook? Although there have been some high-profile defections — the co-founders of WhatsApp, Instagram and Oculus, all companies bought by Facebook, left in the last few months — Mr. Zuckerberg’s most loyal executives have been with him through thick and thin, many for more than a decade.
If Facebook admits now that its problems were caused by a too-idealistic, move-fast culture, and if it is conceding now that its culture must change, how can we be sure that’s happening if most of the people who run Facebook remain the same?
When I asked Facebook about this, the company argued that things were changing. It just hired Nick Clegg, a former deputy prime minister of Britain, as head of global affairs — a move that the company said imbued it with a serious outsider’s perspective.

The social network also put me on the phone with a top executive who argued boisterously for Mr. Zuckerberg’s leadership, but declined to do so on the record. The executive explained that fixing Facebook would involve deep costs. The company is hiring more people to review content, for example, and it might have to slow down some of its most ambitious projects to address its impact on the world. The executive argued that Mr. Zuckerberg’s total domination of Facebook’s equity, plus the reverence in which employees hold him, allowed him to weather the financial consequences of these changes better than any other leader.
Facebook’s stock price plunged nearly 20 percent on a single day this summer after it reported slowing revenue growth and increased operational costs. This week, Facebook repeated its slower-growth warning. A “professional C.E.O.,” one without such a huge stake in the company, would be tempted to try the easy way out, the executive suggested. But Mr. Zuckerberg was free to do what’s right.
Mr. Zuckerberg’s supporters also argued that he has shown a deep capacity to understand and address Facebook’s problems. After the company went public in 2012, its stock price languished for months because it had no plan to make money from consumers’ shift to mobile devices.
“Mark would tell you that he was too late in understanding the importance of mobile — but when that became apparent, Mark understood its gravity and he understood how to fix it,” said Don Graham, a former Facebook board member and former publisher of The Washington Post. “He changed the direction of that company incredibly fast, in detail, not by one action but by 20 actions — and if you looked at the quarter-by-quarter numbers of what percentage of Facebook’s revenue was coming from mobile, I couldn’t believe how fast it changed.”
The question at Facebook now is whether Mr. Zuckerberg has similarly seen the light on its current problems. He has said fixing Facebook was his personal challenge for 2018. But there are signs that its culture remains the same.
Consider its promise that a new home-hub device, Portal, which it unveiled this month, would not collect information on users that could be used in ads. It had to swiftly walk back that promise because Facebook’s data-collection system is so pervasive that even some of its employees don’t seem to understand it.
“I think he has demonstrably failed over the last two years, and the reason he’s failed is because he’s unaccountable,” said Sandy Parakilas, a former Facebook employee who is now chief strategy officer for the Center of Humane Technology, an activist organization. “Given a scenario where shareholders and board members had more influence, it’s hard to imagine that there would not have been changes faster.”

One fix for Facebook might be to give the board greater power over the company. Trillium Asset Management, an investment firm, recently put forward a shareholder resolution supported by several state funds that would require Mr. Zuckerberg to step down as Facebook’s chairman, though he would still maintain majority voting control of the company.
“I think by taking the step to relinquish the position of the board chair, it’s a very important structural change so that he would not have a completely free hand to muscle his way through decisions,” said Jonas Kron, a Trillium senior vice president.
A Facebook spokesman said the company had not yet taken a position on the resolution. In the past, similar measures have been voted down by Mr. Zuckerberg and his allies.
Which leaves us here: Either Mr. Zuckerberg fixes Facebook, or no one does. That’s the choice we face, like it or not.