Where next?

My mother and father lived through the transportation revolution. My wife and I have lived through the data revolution. What wonders will my children and their families see?

My grandfather and his wife moved to Chloride, New Mexico Territory, around the turn or the century (19th to the 20th, that is). New Mexico wasn't yet a state. Chloride was a mining community an my grandfather, in addition to being a doctor, was also the sheriff. I have his 6-shooter in a desk drawer. It's no Uzi.

Shortly after my father was born in 1905, the family returned to Ohio. I don't know whether they came by train or by horse-drawn conveyance, but I'm sure that the trip took at least days, and probably weeks. There were few motorized vehicles in those days. My father grew up to become an electrical contractor, but when he arrived back in Ohio only the big cities had electrical power–and only in some areas. Rural electrification was still several decades in the future.

By the time he died in 1967 (at the too-young age of 62), electrical service was ubiquitous. Our small town, Bellefontaine, had sold its city-owned power generating plant to Dayton Power and Light (which eventually became part of American Electric Power). Instead of horse-drawn carriages, we had gasoline-powered automobiles and we could travel from Bellefontaine to New Philadelphia, where my aunts, uncles, and cousins lived, in less than a day.

My father was never in a room with a computer. In 1967, computers filled entire rooms. I was still at Ohio State University (before it became The Ohio State University) and the radio-television-speech curriculum was as up-to-date as the 1950s. By the mid 1970s, when I returned to (The) OSU to take classes in journalism and computer programming, there was talk of a "personal computer" that might help people run their homes. I recall writing a research paper on the topic, but I don't recall what mental image I had. Xerox was already busy at work inventing the personal computer in Palo Alto.

In those days, I made "party mix" audio recordings with vinyl LPs and a reel-to-reel recorder. It was a "real-time" operation, meaning that an hour's worth of party mix would take an hour to record -- plus time downtime needed to swap records, rewind the tape, and count the grooves in the record. It was more like 90 minutes for every hour's worth of music. And I had to hope that the record didn't skip.

In those days, I was an advanced amateur photographer, too. I could drop a roll of film off at some locations and have prints within 24 hours. If I wanted to share the pictures with anyone, I'd need to have reprints made (which would probably take a week or more) and then mail them.

If all that sounds primitive, it was. I remember being amazed, in 1969, when the radio station I worked for in Fort Wayne bought something called a "cassette recorder" that I could take with me when I covered a visit by President Nixon to Indianapolis. I was able to take a telephone apart and use alligator clips to connect the recorder directly to the phone. Within an hour of the time the event ended, we had audio on the air.

Today ...

• There are recorders small enough to be housed in microphones. Or we'll just use available technology to take the feed live.
• During the time I've been writing this report, I've imported 89 selections (4.5 hours) by the Supremes into Itunes and I'll be able to include any of these sections (or any of the other 13,000+ tracks in Itunes) in any play list I want.
• When I take pictures, I can e-mail them to people anywhere in the world and the recipient will have the pictures within minutes of the time I created them.

It's tempting to write something like "everything that can be invented has already been invented." Tempting. But wrong. By 2050, what we're doing today will be as silly and antiquated as Ford's Model A.

High tech or high touch?

A company that advertised on WTVN many years ago talked about being both "high tech" and "high touch". That's an important distinction and the best companies do both well. The credit card industry is definitely high tech, but some providers are also high touch. Getting either side wrong is a recipe for disaster.

Several years ago, I stopped doing business with one of the nation's major banks because the company routinely refused website charges that originated in England. After several months of explaining the problem to them, I finally gave up. As far as I know, they're still in business, but I'm no longer patronizing them.

On the other hand, there's American Express.

I started using an Amex card about 2 years ago. I've had to call the company a few times about one thing or another. In one case, I'd made a payment late because I was traveling. The person I spoke with immediately waived the late fee and was so polite in the process that I felt a bit guilty about even asking.

Near the end of 2005, 2 companies double billed me. Normally when this happens, the company notices the problem and posts a credit. In this case, neither company noticed. I called both and explained the problem. I'd dealt with one of the companies for more than 10 years. The other company was new to me. Both admitted that they had double billed and both promised to fix the problem.

Neither did. So I called Amex. The person I spoke with apologized even though the problem wasn't hers or her company's. Both charges were reversed immediately even though one of them was complicated by the company's changing its name between the first charge and the second. The Amex representative had to try several times to resolve the issue because of that.

I wrote to both companies. One (the one I've dealt with for 10 years or more) apologized for the delay, said that they should have taken care of it and apologized for failing to do so, and said they looked forward to the correction from American Express. The other – the one that had already told me that I would have to call their customer service (loosely speaking) department again to beg for a refund – didn't bother to reply.

Needless to say, I won't be buying anything from that company again.

American Express did the right things the right way. When a customer complains about an incorrect charge, the credit card company must immediately remove the charge (pending resolution of the problem), but the company doesn't have to do it the way American Express did. Dealing with American Express by phone is a pleasure even when the circumstances that created the need for the call aren't.

Amex is one company that "gets it" when it comes to customer satisfaction.

How to identify a real request from your bank

A big West Coast company just sent a reminder to all of its employees about phishing messages that claim to be from PayPal. I said to the security lead "Should anyone in a high-tech company such as Xxxxxxxxx fall for this nonsense? If so, I'm frightened," and the response was "I totally agree. I hope that this is not the case." Is it really so hard to tell the difference between a phishing attempt and a legitimate message?

I've dissected several phishing attempts in the past. These messages never specify the account, but ask you to provide it. I have two general rules when dealing with messages that claim to be from financial institutions: First, never follow a link that's included in a message that claims to come from a financial institution. Second, never give the "institution" information it should already know and not be asking about.

Here's an example of a real message.

I recently needed to change an address. I made the request online and received the confirmation shown above. Some points of interest:

1. The message told me that I needed to take NO ACTION unless the request described in the message was incorrect.
2. It stated a specific action that I had requested.
3. It gave me enough information (the final 4 digits) to identify the account. Always the FINAL FEW DIGITS. Listing the first 4 or 5 digits of an account number is meaningless. All accounts at the bank begin with the same 4 or 5 digits.
4. It showed me the date and time I made the request.
5. It told me that the change would not be effective immediately and that I could CALL if I had not initiated the change. It gave me the phone number, which I would not trust because phishers could try this technique.
6. It warned me not to reply to the e-mail. (Phishers often do this now.)
7. It told me to visit the bank's website (I would not use the link provided) and sign on, but also suggested that I should call.

It's really not difficult to avoid being taken in.

Nerdly News

AOL goes after phishers

AOL has filed lawsuits against three major phishing gangs and wants $18 million from them. The suits cite Virginia's anti-phishing statute that became law in mid 2005. The suit also invokes two federal statutes – the Lanham Act and the Computer Fraud & Abuse Act.

AOL's suits allege that the phishing gangs victimized AOL and CompuServe members through e-mails that attempted to trick and lure them to fake websites.

AOL's Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Curtis Lu, says "Phishing scams have grown more sophisticated and more dangerous to consumers. At AOL, we are using every legal and technical means at our disposal to drive phishers from the AOL service, not only to protect our members, but to make the Internet a better, safer place for all consumers. The phishers targeted in our lawsuits spoof a variety of prominent Internet brands, including AOL. We are going to continue to play our part in protecting the sanctity and integrity of the email experience of the web - and today's actions are a part of our ongoing, successful, and comprehensive antispam and anti-identity theft work."

The suits target identity thieves who sent official-looking emails to AOL members in an attempt to trick and lure them to web sites that mimicked the appearance and feel of official AOL or CompuServe web sites. Phishing is a growing online threat as scammers adapt and refine their fraudulent efforts to trick consumers into giving up personal information.

A 2005 survey of personal computers by AOL and the National Cyber Security Alliance found that 1 of every 4 home computer users are hit by phishing attacks each month.

Apple puts Intel in the Mini

This week Apple announced a new version of the Mini with Intel Core Duo processors. The new machines will be quite a bit faster than the previous models -- under some circumstances, 4 times faster. Apple also added more expansion ability to the Mini. The base machine, however, ships with an Intel Core Solo processor. It'll cost you $200 more to get the Duo and -- by the time you add enough memory and other extras, along with Apple's extended warranty -- you'll be up around $1400.

Apple advertises the Solo version starting at $1 less than $600, so the price will appear smaller by starting with a 5 instead of a 6 ($x99 prices are inherently dishonest, in my opinion). The new Mac Mini comes with a 667MHz front-side bus and far too little RAM, but enough slots to install 2GB of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM. There's a built-in 10/100/1000 BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet, built-in AirPort Extreme 802.11g WiFi, built-in Bluetooth 2.0, Firewire, and 4 USB 2.0 ports. There's also a digital video interface and a VGA adapter for those who don't yet have a digital monitor.

Apple has now moved about half of its product line to Intel and the company did it within about 2 months of the time it announced the change.

The new Mac Mini is shipping now and you should be able to find it online and at Apple's stores and elsewhere.

Annoying legal disclaimer

My attorney says I really need to say this: The Technology Corner website is for informational purposes only. Neither Joe nor I assume any responsibility for its accuracy, although we do our best. The information is subject to change without notice. Any actions you take based on information from the radio program or from this website are entirely at your own risk. Products and services are mentioned for informational purposes only and their various trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective owners. Technology Corner cannot provide technical support for products or services mentioned on the air or on the website.