Can we trust the internet with a credit card?

If a supposedly secure, world-wide service can be hacked, should we really be shopping online at all?


Somebody 'may' have got hold of 70 million peoples' credit card details this week, according to Sony.

Yes, the Playstation Network (PSN), which allows millions of PS3 and PSP owners to play games online has been hacked, causing the service to be suspended for over a week, but more worryingly, for the card numbers, date of birth, email and physical addresses of all of its users to potentially be compromised.

If PSN can be hacked, and card details (like mine) obtained, then what about other websites? Amazon is completely secure. It displays that little gold padlock in the corner when you buy something. So does Paypal, and eBay, and Play.com. I've used all these sites and never have I received a phone call from my bank asking why I've started bulk buying iPods and Bulgarian porn. But the risk remains.

I must stress that these sites are secure, and I have heard no reports of them being hacked. But it could happen, theoretically. If PSN, a 70-million user service from a world-recognised corporation, can be hacked open, why not one of these sites? If there is even a slight risk, why shop online at all?

Well, some don't. And they aren't all old fogeys who don't know what an internet is. My 18-year-old brother refuses to shop online because he doesn't trust a computer to feed his money digits down a webpipe to some company in the hope he'll receive something in the post four days later. There are plenty who feel the same way.

But we've come a long way since the early days of the internet. The fact is, there is virtually no risk at all in buying from a reputable, recognised website. The level of security is beyond military standard. People's lives are one thing, but if there is money involved, the security goes up to another level.

Yes, PSN was supposed to be that secure, and it might have been compromised. That's a huge error on Sony's part. But games console networks are in their infancy. The Playstation 2 didn't have any sort of network, and the PS3 has only had one for five years. Now that it has happened, future games consoles will be doubly or triply secure.

Sites like eBay and Amazon have years of security experience behind them. If we can't trust them now, we probably never can.

So, can we trust them now? Well, it's up to individuals to determine if it's worth that risk. In my eyes, I take a larger risk of having my card details stolen every time I leave the house than I do when I shop online. Shopping on Amazon is the equivalent of using the cash machine with an army of fifty bodyguards by your side. Out on the street, I'm a scrawny white bloke who couldn't fight a paper receipt, let alone a paper bag or a mugger.

But it is up to the companies who run these websites to persuade people how safe they really are, though. Sony has a lot of damage control to do, and if peoples' accounts do start emptying, it could set web shopping trust back years.

If Sony is the weak link that ruins internet shopping for the rest of us, then it will have a lot more to worry about than the Playstation Network.

Internet shopping should be treated with a heavy dose of caution, but it's as safe as anything else in life: 99%. Nothing can ever be totally safe.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to wait for a possible phone call about some Bulgarian videos.

Does liking technology mean hating the world?

So, it's Earth Day today, apparently. To honour it, I've been tweeting from my laptop while using my PS3 on a 40" TV and charging my phone, all at once. Again.

It's ironic that the rise of consumer technology has come about at the exact same time as the eco-revolution.

At one time in the mid-noughties it was estimated that computers took 12% of all the world's electricity useage. While it may sound fairly small, that figure means that for all the lights, shops, factories,businesses and heating systems in the world, computers still took this huge chunk of power just for Liking biscuits on facebook and watching iPlayer.

For the average tech junkie, you'll probably find any of the following running all at once in one room: a TV, games console, smartphone charger, laptop/PC, iPod/mp3 player, stereo, wireless box, freeview/Sky box. My living room is beginning to resemble the NASA launch centre.

And these are thirsty, thirsty bits of kit. An Xbox 360 will use 1000w of electricity every four hours; a PS3 every three. And while I don't know how much my HTC smartphone needs in juice, I do know it takes longer to charge fully than it does to run flat again.

Surely, then, you can only be a technology fan if you hate the environment, don't believe in global warming, don't care or all of the above.

Well, to a degree. But it isn't our fault.

Yes, we can try to do our bit. We can use rechargeable batteries, we can put our laptops on 'Power Save' mode and we can dim the telly. But there is so little information out there about how much power our tech actually needs that it's difficult to even think about it, let alone act.

I only know how much a PS3 uses because some time-rich anorak plugged it in to a watt-measurement device and put the results online. I certainly don't know how much an iPod, or a TV, or my laptop uses, but I'm sure it's a fair chunk.

Why don't I know? My computer lists endless, incomprehensible features on its side, like 'up to 1308 MB DVMT' (I don't know what this means) as well as listing its green credentials - 'Energy Star Approved' (I do know that this doesn't mean much, since it's on almost every electrical product ever), but nowhere does it say how much electricity it uses.

In these eco-conscious times, green transparency, so to speak, is long overdue. It's high time companies like Sony, Samsung and Apple started listing how much power items need right on the box.

Why is it only washing machines that are energy rated? Computers, TVs, phones and games consoles should be marked from A* to F, too.

Not everyone will notice, not everyone will care. But at least we'd all have the option to make the green choice. It's certainly better than buying ever more powerful devices and wondering why our electricity bills are through the (poorly-insulated) roof.

I could go on, but I'm going to use my last sliver of laptop battery to watch the ice caps melt on YouTube.

iPhones can track our every movement - should we be worried?

Wherever you are, wherever you're going, if you're an iPhone owner,  Apple are going to know about it.


That's because iPhones and iPads are apparently tracking our every movement, according to researchers Alasdair Allan and Pete Warden (original report - BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13145562 ).

It's a pretty terrifying use of technology we assume is designed to make our lives easier, rather than spy on us without telling us.

According to Warden and Allan, the spying is covered in Apple's terms and conditions, in a sort of PR-gibberish way, but frankly we could have all promised our lungs to fifty different companies several times over by now. No-one, no-one reads them, and Apple know it.

So they're being a tad sneaky, but should we be concerned that we're essentially being spied on, 1984-style, by Steve Jobs' Apple army?

In short, no. I want to be spied on. I want my data to be tracked. Yes, it's one small step between data tracking and my iPhone despatching police to my house because they can see I'm at the brothel again, but data tracking actually has the power to make all our lives much easier if it's done right.

Keep getting stuck on the M1? What if Apple send you a reccommendation for a Traffic Check app? Keep going for petrol at your local pump? Perhaps your iPhone informs you it's 3p cheaper to go a mile further afield. Keep shopping at Tesco? Perhaps your phone downloads you a Clubcard app you didn't know existed.

Though it's tempting to see data tracking as some looming freedom-destroyer, it can clearly be used to enrich our lives. We have waited years for technology to be able to do all it can to increase our convenience. We shouldn't shirk it now because we don't want to be a stat in a pile of anonymous data.

I can't wait for the day my fridge orders me fresh milk because it sees I'm running low, or my microwave suggests a dating service because it sees I'm eating a ready-meal lasagne for one for the fifth day running.

Yes, we should all be wary. We don't want our freedoms sold down the river, one app at a time, nor do we want our data handed over to governments to be used to make our lives hell instead. But as long as we keep that healthy caution, there's no reason technology can't be trusted to make everything better.

Don't like it? Sell your iPhone, or don't buy one in the first place. It's probably only a matter of time before a phone comes out which sells itself on the sole premise that it won't track your data, won't analyse your habits or make reccommendations.

But for everyone else, it's a brave new world. And it's damn exciting.

Wii 2: HD, Blu-ray - What if the rumours are true?

The sequel to Nintendo's world-storming Wii console is close. Very close. That's what rumours bursting from inside the industry would have us believe, with most tipping an unveiling at this year's E3 convention - the annual games industry shin-dig where new tech has always been shown off.

It will be HD - but that's a given these days. What's more interesting is that the rumours say it will have a controller with a HD touchscreen, as well as use Blu-ray and a meaty quad-core processor to deliver graphics which are ahead of PS3 and Xbox 360 levels whilst still remaining innovative.

Whilst these rumours should be treated with caution, it is intriguing that the French site which revealed these specs - 01.net - also leaked the final specs of Sony's 'PSP2', the NGP, before the device was made public.


If the rumours are true, it will be interesting to see how Nintendo manages to market the console to its more recent target audience of families and social gamers as opposed to the Modern Warfare, dark room, headset types who will no doubt be more at ease with a high-spec, high-price console than the mums who just want to play Wii Fit.

It would mark a serious departure from Nintendo's low-graphics, high-innovation approach which has seen it sell 225 million DS and Wii consoles in six years.

If Nintendo does return to targeting a more typical gamer audience, it might at once alienate its most recent fans whilst struggling to claw back old fans who grew disillusioned with Wii Play and Brain Training and moved to Xbox or PS3 to get their fix.

The new 3DS might give us some idea. The handheld may not be the most powerful thing ever created, but it does smash the PSP and deliver graphics capable of beating Wii - and in 3D. And with games like Pro Evolution Soccer, Ridge Racer and Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D promising deep experiences rather than light family fare, it marks a shift in focus for Nintendo back to its more traditional roots. The price - £230 - is more than double the launch price of the £99 DS, leaving all but the most fanatical for the device unlikely to open their wallets.

A console which delivers the likes of Zelda, Metroid and Mario Galaxy in glorious HD is a dream to any Nintendo fan, but where does it leave the new crowd?

The controller may provide the answer. While I'm not sure why you'd need a HD screen on a controller (the aspect of the rumour I'm most suspicious of), if it were true that the Wii 2 will use a controller with a touch screen, it would be a way of marketing the console as something a bit different.

Cue adverts of families playing Monopoly on their Wii 2 with their money laid out on their remote screen, or playing 'silly' mini-games whilst smiling un-naturally. Even if it weren't the controller, but some other gimmick (a projector has been rumoured, meaning the console wouldn't need a TV to be played), there is likely to be something to make the console stand out.

There is a danger, though - as there is with 3DS' 3D screen - that the headline feature, the touchscreen controller, thrown in to make the mainstream take notice simply won't do the trick.

That would leave Nintendo in a vulnerable position. PS4 and NeXtbox will likely beat Wii 2 graphics, leaving most developers to make games for that pairing, leaving Wii 2 with only ports of old games (even if those 'old games' are today's PS3 and 360 titles) and the likes of Mario for owners to play. Except they wouldn't have the mass market to fall back on.

On the flipside, it could take the mass market while bringing in the 'hardcore', too, capturing both markets just like the mighty PS2 managed.

Either way, it's going to be an interesting 12 months for the industry's most unconventional of companies.

iPad 2 does 3D screen trick

Researchers in France have managed to get '3D' images to display on iPads using camera-based head tracking.

Jeremie Francone and Laurence Nigay, from EHCI research group have created a program which shows 3D images on the tablet's 9.7 inch screen.

The program uses the devices' front-mounted cameras to track your face. It then moves and tilts the image on-screen so it looks like a 3D image, with real depth.

The difference between this and a 3DTV or a 3DS is that it's just a trick - it isn't really showing 3D at all, and in fact it can run on any normal iPad or iPhone.

DSi's '3D' game, Looksley's Line Up

This trick has actually been seen before - on Nintendo's DSi. Looksley's Line Up, a downloadable DSiWare title, released last year and it used the DSi's front camera to create supposed 3D.

3D is all the rage this year, with 3DS recently becoming the first glasses-free 3D device to hit the mass market and phone-makers LG looking to follow suit with the LG Optimus, the world's first 3D smartphone.


Whether Apple actually take the French pair's research and apply it to their apps and firmware remains to be seen - but it shows how 3D content is being delivered in ever more clever ways.

3DS QR Code

Just a quick update before my next blog proper - for any readers with a 3DS, here's my QR code so you can scan and save my Mii to your system, should you so desire.

It's amazing to think that just a few years ago, we all had 0.1 megapixel cameras on our phones, and now almost every device can compare prices on almost any item just by having a shufty at the box's barcode, enter competitions or swap data - like Miis - in an instant.

If anyone else wants to post their own QR code in the comments below, feel free - it'll be like a Prose and Consoles Mii love-in.

Can the iPad really kill the newspaper?

It's 7am: you lean over your toast, pour some orange juice and flick through the morning paper, chewing over the news while chewing your breakfast.

Only, it's not a 'paper' at all, it's a big square lump of plastic, glass and silicon - an iPad, running the top news apps, flashing up the latest headlines.

For thousands, this scene is already a reality - but will a future where every newspaper is delivered digitally, instantly, and in a proper newspaper format, ever become the present?

What the iPad is packing in 2011 is already enough to put the traditional newspaper under threat if you're a Times reader. For £2 a week, you get the latest version of the paper streamed straight to your iPad every morning, with all the same headlines, pictures, text and layout as the traditional print version - except upgraded to be interactive. It literally marries the best bits of both formats into one impressive - and inexpensive - package.

Other news organisations have been slower off the mark, though. None of the others can boast a digital offering as complete or as comprehensive as Murdoch's outlet. But other papers are slowly coming on board, and it's only a matter of time before we see the likes of The Guardian, The Independent and The Sun get their papers digitised.

Even if we do get to the stage where every notable news outlet is offering their own complete-paper app, will it really spell the end for traditional ink and paper news?

Well, there are several hurdles to vault first. For one thing, iPads are expensive. Really, really expensive. Even if the tech-savvy, cash-rich of the 20-40 group gobble up pads and news apps like there's no tomorrow, that still leaves the rather sizeable group of everyone else who still like to read their news from a piece of paper.

Here in Sheffield, there are fiftysomething blokes in peaked caps whom I'm almost certain are never going to trade up their Daily Bilge for the iPad version while chatting about snuff in their local greasy spoon. Joking aside, there are literally millions of people who for one reason or another just won't take to reading newspapers in a digital form, even if it looks largely identical.

One option often mooted among the media is that papers should give free iPads out on a subscription model, like how mobile operators subsidise phones in exchange for your loyalty. To anyone with an interest in news but without the ability to stretch to £600, this is likely to be much more popular.

But even then, asking people to put another monthly subscription on their overheads, let alone carry a hefty slice of news device everywhere they go, is a big step.

But these are teething problems. The fact is, the iPad, Kindle and Android tablets are increasingly becoming home to a like-for-like version of traditional newspapers, complete with turnable pages and all the same content of a newspaper. One day, you'll wake up and each newspaper and magazine you subscribe to will have been wirelessly streamed to you in your sleep.

Whether that really means that one day, one truly sad day, the printing presses really will grind to a halt remains to be seen.

But you can be sure that if that day comes, you'll probably read the news on your iPad.