Archive for December, 2010

New hedge fund to use Twitter to predict stock market.

Further to my recent post on social media in relation to financial matters, but quite different, is appears that a new British hedge fund in planning to track Twitter in order to attempt to predict the direction of the stock market.

The initiative appears to be based on a recent paper by the University of Manchester and Indiana University, which found that the frequency of certain emotional words could be used, with a high degree of accuracy (87.9%), to predict daily moves in stock markets, between two and six days later.

An exclusive deal has been signed with Dr. Xiao-Jun Zeng, a doctor of computer science at the University of Manchester, to research trading models.

Are you skeptical about how successful this will be? I don’t blame you, but I’m going to try and follow this up to see how well they do in the markets. Apparently the fund is set to start trading with an initial 25 million pounds. Stay tuned.

FCC approves net neutrality rules – good compromise or welcoming your new ISP overlords?

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted new rules in relation to net neutrality, or how internet providers handle traffic and various services.

Democrats on the panel have voted to approve the new enforceable net neutrality rules, which will restrict companies such as AT&T, Verizon and Comcast from blocking access to content unfavorable to them.

The Obama Administration has claimed a win in relation to its net neutrality campaign promise, maintaining it represents progress. Others are claiming the measures do not go nearly far enough. Obama has said:

As technology and the market continue to evolve at a rapid pace, my Administration will remain vigilant and see to it that innovation is allowed to flourish, that consumers are protected from abuse, and that the democratic spirit of the Internet remains intact.

Unsurprisingly, Republicans at the FCC and in Congress are opposed to the new measures, with Sen. Kay Baily from Texas labeling it an unprecedented power grab by unelected members. Republican FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell accused the FCC of becoming a vigilante group in order to help Obama with a misguided campaign promise.

However, there has also been disapproval dished out from many net neutrality advocates. The New America Foundation has said the new rules prioritise the profits of corporations such as AT&T over the public, internet entrepreneurs and local businesses. Public Knowledge maintains that the rules fall far short of what they could have been and Free Press has asserted that the rules amount to fake net neutrality. The Institute of Policy Integrity has labeled the new rules “tepid”.

The main criticisms seem to be that while wired broadband providers may not unreasonably (whatever unreasonably means) discriminate against any lawful traffic, the rules don’t apply to wireless providers. Also, “paid prioritisation” has not been banned. This means that providers may be able to set up paid priority access on networks. “Managed services” are allowed over ‘last mile’ broadband. Providers can sell prioritised IP services of any kind.

In short, critics say that the new rules are full of loopholes and grey areas, hence the distinct lack of celebration from net neutrality advocates. As Ars Technica has pointed out, “damning with faint praise” seems to sum up responses from long-time net neutrality supporters.

Read Write Web has a decent rundown of the “six key principles” underpinning the new rules if you are interested in looking a little closer.

Twitter reveals Top Trending Topics and Most Powerful Tweets for 2010.

In what’s becoming an end of year tradition, if you can call two years in a row a tradition, Twitter has revealed its Top Trending Topics for the year.

The company has also compiled a list of the Most Retweeted tweets, what it asserts to have been the 10 Most Powerful Tweets of 2010, and a tree timeline of some notable people who have joined Twitter over during the year: Who’s New On Twitter.

Twitter 2010: Year In Review

Unsurprisingly, ‘Gulf Oil Spill’, ‘Haiti Earthquake’ and ‘Pakistan Flood’ made it to number 1, 2 and 3 respectively in the News Events section. ‘Wikileaks Cablegate’ appears to have made it to number 7 on the list, even though that particular global brouhaha is still in full swing.

In other topic areas, Apple took out four of the top ten spots in ‘Technology’, and Justin Bloody Bieber took out top spot in ‘People’. Again, no doubt Julian Assange is rocketing up that list at the present time.

Below is a rundown of the Overall Top Trends, if you can’t be bothered clicking the link above and going all the way over to Twitter. I have to say, Inception has been my favourite film for the year too.

  1. Gulf Oil Spill
  2. FIFA World Cup
  3. Inception
  4. Haiti Earthquake
  5. Vuvuzela
  6. Apple iPad
  7. Google Android
  8. Justin Bieber
  9. Harry Potter & the Deathly Hollows
  10. Pulpo Paul

A few of the listed 10 Most Powerful Tweets are certainly debatable, but in my book, this one from hit parody account @BPGlobalPR was a real doozie at the time:

Catastrophe is a strong word, let’s all agree to call it a whoopsie daisy.

What’s your favourite trending topic for the year, or favourite Most Powerful Tweet?

Is social media being used to manipulate financial markets?

In India, the financial regulator, SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India), is planning to use a new suite of software tools to analyse conversations about financial markets in social media.

The software will analyse networks such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as blogs and more traditional social media such as forums. It is thought that some people may be using social media to try to manipulate markets. There has been a sudden rise in the number of cases of alleged manipulation.

SEBI has warned investors against websites offering stock tips, adding that people may expose themselves to undue risk by using unconfirmed information on websites and in social media.

I wonder if the use of such software by regulators to monitor conversations about financial markets and specific stocks will catch on in other countries too?

via The Economic Times

Internet war, what is it good for?

On Wednesday (US time), Dave Winer published a post entitled ‘Are we starting a full-out war on the Internet?‘. This may seem a bit extreme or at least overly dramatic to many, but given the goings on in relation to Wikileaks, and the ongoing fallout from the release US Embassy Cables, it has certainly given me pause to reflect on the question.

Winer states upfront:

I’m afraid it (the storm surrounding Wikileaks) also will draw us into a future that I’ve believed was coming and didn’t want to talk about.

This also reminded me of something that was said in the BBC documentary series I saw on TV here in Australia not long ago, The Virtual Revolution. At one point it asserted that mass warfare on the Web is a strong possibility for the 21st century, and it will be our choice as to whether we take it in that direction, and to what extent.

As far as I know, humans have always been in violent conflict with each other to varying degrees. Is there any reason to think life and actions online will be any different? I certainly hope so. There is the hope that we are heading into a new era where mass warfare may become a thing of the past, as our online global civilisation further develops. Not that there will not be conflict, it’s just that it may look more like civil conflict. In a more globally connected world, to what degree will it be ‘them and us’?

DDOS attacks such as the ones we’ve seen on Wikileaks, and then in retaliation from supporters, on multiple companies that withdrew their digital services from Wikileaks, are nothing new. As I write this, I see that Sarah Palin says she is also under heavy attack from London–based supporters of Wikileaks. What is new is the very high profile nature of this situation, and that it involves the US government, and many other governments around the world. It also goes to the heart of the rapidly changing media industry; many would say an industry in crisis.

As Winer implies, what we have seen in the past few days is a kind of mob mentality emerge, both online and off. It’s all in the spirit of “fighting the good fight” for free speech, on more than one side of the debate in fact. And before we know it, we could be in the middle of an online war that we find it impossible to extricate ourselves from.

As @deekdeekster on Twitter pointed out as I was thinking out loud about writing this post, “the implications of mob internet rule are scary, as much as the strangling of free speech”. There is certainly something to that.

There’s also something to the assertion that governments have been pushing around other governments and their people, and it’s not a surprise that people resent that, and citizens should know what governments are doing in their name. That is indeed a solid reason why Wikileaks (and other whistleblower organisations) should be vigorously defended, and be allowed to continue to exist.

It remains to be seen whether this is how 21st century wars will partly be fought, but it seems highly likely. Many societies are becoming more and more dependent on digital networks. What the present international situation shows is that we are getting to the point where attacking, disrupting and targeting information and the flow of information, and indeed revealing previously secret information, can have a major impact on the world as we know it.