---

It looks like police in Zurich are subscribing to the "if you can't beat them, build them little huts to do the nasty in" theory of prostitution control. Only in Europe.

Prostitution has become such a problem in Switzerland that Zurich officials have made proposals to add "sex boxes" to the city. The idea itself is adopted from German cities like Essen and Cologne, and will be a way for prostitution to continue on behind closed, uh, doors.

The boxes will serve as quickie drive-throughs, so-to-speak, and will free up city streets from unsightly acts that haunt Zurich residents whose homes overlook the city's red light district. "They get up to all sorts in broad daylight - and we're sick to death of looking at it," one resident told the U.K.'s Metro. (Silvio Berlusconi and the Politics of Sex)

From the looks of things, the boxes are big enough to conceal vehicles while prostitutes and clients handle business, away from the public eye.

This somewhat laissez faire approach to Swiss sex industry control even comes an official police endorsement: "We can't get rid of prostitution, so have to learn how to control it," Police spokesman Reto Casanova said.

---

---

Doubtless you’ll have read that the BBC and the book publishing people, HarperCollins, are now in a big legal battle over HarperCollins’ wish to publish an autobiography of the person who wears the Stig suit to work. The BBC has responded with a polite statement, but I must say I feel the urge to add my ten penn’orth about how we see things down at the Top Gear office.

First off, I had to laugh when I read the bit of the HarperCollins statement where it says: “We are disappointed that the BBC has chosen to spend licence fee payers’ money to suppress this book…”. “Disappointed??!!” Give me strength.

“Disappointed” is the word viewers use when they think Top Gear has wasted licence payer money on something stupid or rubbish, and when viewers use it, they usually mean it from the heart. Big book publishing companies worth hundreds of millions do not sit in their boardrooms going: “We are so disappointed”. If I could apply my patented Reality Check (It’s like Spell Check but I haven’t quite invented it yet) to their statement, it should actually read: “We are deeply irritated that the BBC has chosen to spend licence fee payers’ money trying to protect something that belongs to them, as we were hoping to cash in on it in time for Christmas, even though in the eight years the Stig has existed, we’ve contributed absolutely bugger all to the character’s creation or development.”

The fact is, the “waste of licence payer’s money” argument gets trotted out many times as a way of attacking the BBC, but the reality is this: the BBC is a massive organisation. It’s naïve to think it can only ever spend money on cameras, tape for the cameras, Daleks or anything else that contributes directly to what ends up on screen. The BBC also has the right to spend money on protecting the intellectual property it created, because the truth is that all that stuff – the Stig, the Tardis, the Blue Peter dog – does belong to the licence payer, and not to some opportunists who think they can come along and take a slice when they feel like it.

As you can tell I’m quite cross at the moment, but there’s plenty to be cross about. Last week, instead of working on the next series, I had to go to court. If you go to court you have to look smart, which meant I had to dig my suit out of the back of the wardrobe, and the last time I wore that suit George Michael could still drive in a straight line. So on Monday there I was, dressed like somebody who works behind the till at NatWest, having to listen to people from HarperCollins telling me that they have the right to reveal who the Stig is. Well actually, that’s tosh. The whole point of the Stig is the mystique – the bizarre characteristics he has, the wonderment created about what he might think, feel, do or look like. Kids adore the conceit, and I believe adults, although they know it’s a man in a suit (or is it?), gladly buy into the whole conceit because they find it entertaining. Even the papers, who love to make mischief, have kept everyone guessing over the years because they acknowledge that viewers like the Stig secrecy thing.

Anyway, HarperCollins have decided none of that is as important as their profits, so if you get your Christmas ruined by one of the best and most harmless TV secrets being outed, you can rest easy in the knowledge that by contrast, HarperCollins’ executives will be enjoying a fantastic Christmas.

So why are we fighting in court? Well, obviously we want to protect the Stig’s anonymity for the reasons I’ve just outlined. Also, it’s an issue of trust. Everyone who’s ever worked on Top Gear has kept the Stig thing a secret, and the person who wears the suit has signed confidentiality agreements to do the same. So talk about what you like in your own life, but not the bit you agreed not to. Your word is supposed to mean something.

Some of you will say we’re also trying to protect a brand the BBC makes money out of. You’re right there too. The Stig does make money for BBC Worldwide, which is a business, and some of it is invested back into the business, some of it is paid out in dividends, and crucially, some of it goes back into funding the TV show. And the show needs that money, ‘cos this ain’t a cheap piece of telly. And actually, while I’m on the money point, BBC Worldwide are also picking up half the tab for this case, so it’s by no means just licence fee payers’ money being spent.

Inevitably, Fleet St has endless opinions on what BBC Worldwide should do with its money. Only yesterday morning Stephen Glover wrote a very robust piece in the Daily Mail about Top Gear’s commercial affairs. But since he can’t actually count up how many shows we make a year (it’s 14, not 8 Mr Glover), I’m not sure I’d trust the rest of his maths. Besides that, like every outsider he doesn’t know the details of any confidentiality clauses we have going, he doesn’t know about Top Gear internal relationships, and he doesn’t know who the Stig is, and sadly I can’t help put him right because we’re in the middle of a load of legal tussles, and I wouldn’t want to anyway, because it’s a secret.

Speaking of which, I’ll be back in court sometime soon, looking once more like an office junior at Foxtons, and we’ll be fighting our corner. If we lose at this stage, it won’t be over but the book will be published and the papers will have a field day with a barrage of headlines about “Humiliating Climbdowns” etc. But so be it. Bring it on. Do you want a BBC that runs away from a snidey headline, or one that fights to protect its belongings? What’s the saying? “It’s better to die on your feet than live on your knees”.

A bit dramatic I know, but the fact is, the ramshackle, dysfunctional family that is the Top Gear team, from the newest runner right up to Jeremy, Richard and James, has worked bloody hard for many years to make the Stig something worth caring about, and that includes protecting it from a bunch of chancers.

---

---

First Facebook didn't want anyone else to have the word "book" in the name of his or her online community and now it doesn't want anyone to have the word "face" either.

Facebook has apparently taken over the trademark application for "Face" from a company who operated a site called Faceparty.com and is trying to pursue the trademark. It won't be an easy task though, because Aaron Greenspan—the fellow who took Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to court over the creation of Facebook—is opposing the application according to TechCrunch:

---

---

Facebook officially launched its "Places" location-based product on Wednesday, backed by seeming rivals Foursquare and Gowalla.

Facebook had been expected to announce a location service, ever since it announced the press conference earlier this week. Perhaps in response, Foursquare updated its privacy settings as well.

The Places service officially goes live Thursday, although an iPhone app will go live Wednesday night. The touch.facebook.com site will also go live, for HTML5-compliant browsers.

Facebook broadcast the press conference via its Facebook Live service, which the company launched last week.

According to Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook Places has been in development for several months. It had three goals, he said: helping share where you are in a nice and social way, to see who's around you, and just discover new and cool places to visit in the future.

Analysts pegged the announcement as a significant one for Facebook.

"This is an important announcement as it establishes Facebook immediately as not only a credible player in this space but arguably the most important player," Michael Gartenberg, an analyst with The Altimeter Group," wrote in a blog post. "I've argued in the past the features such as "check in" are more of a feature than a standalone service and therefore the idea of integrating this directly into Facebook, already a key hub of social activity makes sense. The fact that Facebook is also offering an API for others to tap into means that there's now a good foundation and framework in place that sets the stage for Facebook to bring both brands and local retailers in very quickly."

Places will be part of an iPhone app going live tonight, as well as on a special Places subdomain within Facebook. Facebook will also launch an API for its partners.

Checkin data will be provided soon. Search data for nearby places and is in testing with a small number of partners, executives said. Gowalla chief technical officer Scott Raymond appeared on stage to endorse the new Facebook platform, as did Holger Luedorf, the vice president of mobile products for FourSquare.

"Facebook validates the market," Luedorf said.

Facebook included tagging and the ability to check friends in as well, with strict privacy controls. Users can opt out if they wish, both from tagging and checking in.

---

---

Music labels and radio broadcasters can't agree on much, including whether radio should be forced to turn over hundreds of millions of dollars a year to pay for the music it plays. But the two sides can agree on this: Congress should mandate that FM radio receivers be built into cell phones, PDAs, and other portable electronics.

The Consumer Electronics Association, whose members build the devices that would be affected by such a directive, is incandescent with rage. "The backroom scheme of the [National Association of Broadcasters] and RIAA to have Congress mandate broadcast radios in portable devices, including mobile phones, is the height of absurdity," thundered CEA president Gary Shapiro. Such a move is "not in our national interest."

"Rather than adapt to the digital marketplace, NAB and RIAA act like buggy-whip industries that refuse to innovate and seek to impose penalties on those that do."

But the music and radio industries say it's a consumer-focused proposition, one that would provide "more music choices."

---

---

Ron Sveden feared the worst when months of coughing and troubled breathing left his doctors dumbfounded. But a shocking x-ray finally revealed what was causing his symptoms.

Sveden had a problem sprouting in his lungs. For months, the 75-year-old had been coughing. His health was taking a turn for the worse, but doctors couldn't find what was wrong.

"I was not doing too well," Sveden said. "A lot of coughing, I was very listless."

Already battling emphysema, Sveden prepared himself to face a tumor and lung cancer until he found out something very different was growing.

"I was told that I had a pea seed in my lung that had split and had sprouted," explained Sveden.

Attachment 2291

Sveden's magic bean had gone down the wrong way. Instead of swallowing it, the pea traveled down into his windpipe, lodged inside his lung, and had begun to take root. The seed grew to one-and-a-half-inches, which had a sprout-like appearance, eventually causing Sveden's lung to collapse.

"Whether this would've gone full term, and I'd be working for the Jolly Green Giant, I don't know," said Sveden.

Although Sveden's case is a rare one, doctors say the environment inside our lungs is very much like a greenhouse.

"The conditions are right for things to grow. It's like having your garden during the summer," explained Dr. Ron Crystal, Chief of Pulmonary Medicine at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. "If the right seed is there, and it has the right nutrients, it possibly could grow."

But should you be worried the next time you eat your vegetables? Doctors say just remember your mother's advice and chew your food.

"We should always be careful about what we eat. And how fast we eat it," added Dr. Crystal.

Now out of the hospital and back at home, Sveden and his wife Nancy feel extremely lucky.

"God has such a sense of humor," said Nancy. "I mean, it could've been just nothing. But it had to be a pea, and it had to be sprouting."

And although the plant growing inside his lung nearly killed him, Sveden hasn't stopped eating his vegetables.

"One of the first meals I had in the hospital after the surgery they had peas for the vegetable," said Sveden with a smile on his face. "I laughed to myself and ate them."

---

---

The 25-year-old woman, identified as Melodi Dushane, has been sentenced to 60 days in jail for attacking the fast food joint's staff and damaging property in the process. She has also been ordered to pay for the broken window.


The incident took place on Jan 1, 2010 at around 6 am (local time) when the woman drove to McDonald's in Toledo and ordered for chicken nuggets.

On being told that nuggets were not available and only breakfast items were being served, the woman threw a tantrum.
http://news.oneindia.in/2010/08/11/u...n-in-jail.html

---

---

SAN FRANCISCO — Google and Verizon on Monday introduced a proposal for how Internet service should be regulated — and were immediately criticized by groups that favor keeping the network as open as possible.


According to the proposal, Internet service providers would not be able to block producers of online content or offer them a paid “fast lane.” It says the Federal Communications Commission should have the authority to stop or fine any rule-breakers.

The proposal, however, carves out exceptions for Internet access over cellphone networks, and for potential new services that broadband providers could offer. In a joint blog post, the companies said these could include things like health care monitoring, “advanced educational services, or new entertainment and gaming options.”

The two companies are hoping to influence regulators and lawmakers in the debate over a principle known as net neutrality, which holds that Internet users should have equal access to all types of information online.

This principle is crucial for consumers and for fostering innovation among Internet entrepreneurs, Eric E. Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, said in a call with reporters. “The next two people in a garage really do need an open Internet,” he said.

But some proponents of net neutrality say that by excluding wireless and other online services, Google and Verizon are creating a loophole that could allow carriers to circumvent regulation meant to ensure openness.

---

---

Skype, the Internet telephony company, is looking to raise up to $100 million in an initial public offering, according to an S-1 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The company will be selling American Depositary Shares (ADSs) and will trade on the NASDAQ Global Market. The offering will be managed by Goldman, Sachs & Co., J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley and others. The offering was widely viewed as in the cards, though I admit it came sooner than I thought.

Skype’s decision to go public is a result of the company turning into a cash machine. It currently has 560 million registered users and about 124 million of them are active on monthly basis, while about 8.1 million of them are monthly paying users — who on average pay $96 a year for the service. Any increase in the number of average monthly paying users is going to help the company erase any losses and goose up its revenues.

For the first six months of 2010, Skype reported revenue of $406 million, and net income of $13.2 million. During 2009, Skype had sales of $719 million and a loss of $99 million. Skype’s revenues are only going to accelerate as the company’s deals with folks like Verizon Wireless and television makers such as Samsung and LG start paying off.



The company had 6.4 million billing minutes during the first six months of 2010, versus 10.7 billion minutes during 2009. The company logged 88.4 billion Skype-to-Skype minutes so far in 2010, versus 113 billion Skype-to-Skype minutes in 2009. This shows that with time, the network effect only compounds usage, which is a good thing for the company. Even a fractional increase in the usage can translate into billable minutes.

All this isn’t without risk, as Skype notes in the S-1.

.

Why the huge gap between the number of registered and paying users, as noted above? For one, Skype says that not all registered users are unique users.

eBay sold a 65 percent stake in Skype to private equity investors in November 2009 for about $1.9 billion. The group of investors included Silver Lake Partners, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. Skype founders Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis settled with the company after a long prolonged fight over intellectual property and got a hefty portion of the new Skype. Skype gave JoltID, a company controlled by Zennstrom and Friis, about 10 percent of the equity (valued about about $224 million) and a net payment of $85 million in cash. JoltID bought 3.4 percent of shares in cash for $85 million. In addition, Skype invested $10 million in Niklas and Janus’ venture fund, Atominico and and another $6 million in their new service, Rdio.

The S-1 does not describe who is selling how many shares and who actually stands to make the most amount of money — though I suspect we’ll hear that in coming months. Either way, the Skype IPO has the makings of one of those hot deals — one that has a dash of irrationality attached to it.

---