Papa Hari News Service

In a revolutionary development that will change the face of the Internet forever, the newly appointed Papa Hari World Government has issued a complete and total ban on internet hyperlinks in their current form. Claiming that the move will result in better Internet browsing habits and help webmasters earn more money with the newly launched innovatively named Papa Hari Internet Advertising Service (PHIAS), a Papa Hari Government spokesman assured internet users that their online rights would not be taken away as a result of this move.

"At present, we noticed that the biggest impediment to poor webmasters making lots of money on the Internet is because of the huge number of non-advertising hyperlinks plastered all over the internet competing with the advertising links. In a sense, by banning hyperlinks in their current form, we're actually helping webmasters make money by ensuring a very high Click-Through Rate!" He continued, "So far online advertising, being optional, has suffered from many disadvantages. It is our innovative idea to make internet advertising compulsory for every single website and that's what we're doing right now."

When asked about how every any internet document will link to another in the future, the spokesman declared a new HTML "tag" that would automatically earn money for the webmaster through the Papa Hari Internet Advertising Service. This new tag, innovatively named <PAPAHARIINTERNETADVERTISINGLINK> will automatically redirect all hyperlinks to the Papa Hari Internet Advertising website and then on to the intended target URL.

"It's really simple to convert existing non-advertising hyperlinks to the Papa Hari advertising hyperlinks," the spokesman added, "Just wrap all your tags with the all new, shiny <PAPAHARIINTERNETADVERTISINGLINK> tag and you're set to go. As a result of this move, every link will earn money for the webmaster! And of course, the Papa Hari Internet Advertising Service will take a service commission on these links."

When asked how a particular popular search engine would react, the Papa Hari Spokesman said that even Search Engines might be banned under the new Papa Hari World Government so the question of competition would become moot.

"By banning search engines we shall leave users with no choice but to click on the high-quality Papa Hari Internet Advertising links to discover new websites. Better still, by launching the Papa Hari Internet Search Engine (PHISE) we will introduce the all new <PAPAHARIINTERNETADVERTISINGLINK> tag on every search result, so we will continue earning even more money that way without having to share our profits with independent webmasters. And if webmasters refuse to implement the new tag on their websites, we reserve our right to arrest and hold them in custody indefinitely. We're working on a new Law towards this end!"

Several internet experts feared that this move would result in a complete monopoly for the Papa Hari World Government on the internet. "We fear that such a move would be totally against human rights!"

Several internet users were shocked at this new edict by the Papa Hari World Government. A few web developers also claimed that the new tag <PAPAHARIINTERNETADVERTISINGLINK> would not be XHTML 1.0 compliant and would break compatibility with existing browsers. "But with the power at the command of the Papa Hari World Government, it would be a matter of days before it becomes an official W3C standard and adopted by all major web browsers," said a bitter blogger who wished to remain anonymous. "But even worse, just imagine how much more typing would be involved to have to wrap this tag around every single link! It's a horrible thought!"

The Papa Hari World Government has denied that it was trying to clamp down on internet users with such a move and said that it was meant to benefit all users. "The new tag has several advantages over the old <A HREF=...> tag," said the Papa Hari government spokesman, "The biggest advantage is that these tags are Papa Hari Government approved and certified." He also dismissed suggestions that the Papa Hari World Government was going to censor the Internet. "We believe in Freedom of Speech and Expression!" he added, "But we also believe in the right of every webmaster to earn a living through internet advertising and that's why we have introduced our revolutionary Papa Hari Internet Advertising Service as the new standard for internet linking!"

In the meantime several unconfirmed rumours were doing the rounds, the most interesting of them being that the next move of the Papa Hari World Government would be to ban Domain Names completely so that people would be forced to remember IP addresses. While the Papa Hari World Government has not responded to this rumour, it is believed that such a move has been contemplated by the higher officials in order to further increase the efficiency of the <PAPAHARIINTERNETADVERTISINGLINK> tag. An internet expert commented: "very soon, I expect web browsers to stop including a navigation bar and a bookmarking feature so that the only way to browse the web would be to click <PAPAHARIINTERNETADVERTISINGLINK>s."

I've been noticing a new trend with worry. A lot of web designers are optimizing their website to work with Firefox and ignoring every other browser out there. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but when websites start actively *recommending* Firefox for "best results", I'm getting worried. It reminds me of a few years ago when many websites would refuse to work properly with any browser other than Internet Explorer. Worse, when plugins and extensions refuse to install in Debian Iceweasel just because it's not called Firefox (Iceweasel is Firefox rebranded in Debian due to legal reasons) it starts getting a bit ridiculous.

Now I'm not a Firefox hater, but there are plenty of other browsers out there I could use, like Opera or even Konqueror on Linux. The lack of a 64-bit version of Opera is an impeding factor here, but given a choice I would use it instead of Firefox because it just is better in many ways. For instance its built-in RSS reader is miles ahead of Firefox's "Live Bookmarks" and its rendering engine is a tad faster. That's not the point though.

The point is that I am a big believer in open standards and I think no single web browser should control them. Microsoft did it with Internet Explorer after winning the browser war against Netscape, but now that Firefox is starting to dominate the browser scene, we should watch for the same problems.

There are specifically some issues I'm concerned about, like

• The assumption that all users are using Windows XP or higher.
• The reliance on non-standard browser features.
• The lack of cross-platform and multi-architecture (x86, AMD64 etc.) support for certain technologies.

I believe that no website should be optimized for viewing in any single browser, even if that browser is Firefox. I am a big believer in standards compliance on the web and more importantly, interoperability and platform independence. It doesn't matter whether a web browser is proprietary or Free software, so long as it complies with accepted standards.

I've never been a big fan of Orkut-style social networking websites where you create user profiles, add friends and exchange messages. Somehow, I've not got into them. These social network sites, in spite of being so feature-rich and user-friendly are nothing more than glorified online contact lists. Yes, you collect a whole bunch of "friends", but what does that really achieve? A simple e-mail address book is a much better social network tool and much less clunky. After my initial burst with social networks, I've not found anything to draw me back to them. I hardly log into Orkut these days. Even the excitement of discovering my old school mates through such channels has died down. I feel that those sites are nothing more than self-centred networks. Your main focus is your own profile. And everything else centres around you. To me, at least, these self-centred networks don't have a great deal of attraction. My blog does a better job in that case.

Oh, I am aware that you can build discussion forums and communities around these social networking sites, but discussion communities are not unique to social networking. Discussion groups and online forums have existed in a far simpler form long before the whole "Web 2.0" phenomenon came into existence.

And then there are the link submission-style (social bookmarking) sites like Digg and StumbleUpon. Once again, I'm not a big user of those. Yes, they do help you get a link back but most of these links are worthless from an SEO point of view (unless your article gets to the front-page somehow). It's true that you might get a lot of traffic for a couple of days from such sites. But then again, it does nothing to promote real social interaction. Additionally you are bound by the likes and dislikes of those communities. I generally find that the communities who use social bookmarking are extremely unreceptive to topics other than technology (and to an extent politics). Thus they are useful to you only if you follow their trends and write about their kind of topics. Besides most of the visitors who come to read your website after clicking on such sites never return. Finally, to the best of my knowledge (and from what I've learned from others), the traffic from social bookmarking sites never generate much advertising revenue anyway. It's merely the internet equivalent of 15 minutes of fame.

I know a lot of you will disagree with this. In fact, I have no doubt that most people will have made better use of social networking and social bookmarking tools than I have and see them as very valuable online resources, but then this article is about how I see them. It seems to me that the whole social-networking thing is overhyped. I always follow my own path in this - most of my friends online are people who've been interacting with me regularly by e-mail for years and those who I've come to know over a period of time. I know I'm old fashioned

I'm subscribed to around 20 to 30 blogs through Live Bookmarks in Firefox and a few more blogs which I check out occasionally (without being subscribed to them). I don't know if it is the time of the year, but most of these blogs have gone quiet of late. Some haven't received updates in several months now while others have slowed down gradually and come to a standstill. It's not just one or two blogs. Dozens of blogs which were active a few months ago have suddenly experienced a freeze mode.

I cannot find any reasons for this broad trend although I do think that a lot of people start blogging at a frenetic pace and then find that they cannot keep up because they're too busy, lack the motivation to write or simply don't have anything to talk about. I know it's not easy and especially when creative inspiration is at its lowest ebb. I often start writing at random and find that I am writing nonsense, so I click the "delete" button. You won't believe how many articles I've deleted that way. In short it takes a lot of effort just to write something meaningful when you're short of ideas.

Nevertheless, I wanted to break the trend in case you belong to my little piece of the web, so you have something to check out.

Following a recent kidnap and murder case which involved the social networking site Orkut, there has been a lot of noise and dust raised in the Indian media and public about how wicked Orkut is and how it should be banned. A lot of typically reactionary articles find their way in every newspaper following such incidents of online crime. I am not really sure of the details of this particular case, but it has once again perpetrated a lot of myths and loose talk in the Press about Orkut in particular and online social networking in general.

First of all, I am no fan of social networking myself, but I have to say that blaming what is essentially a glorified contact list for the kidnapping and murder of an individual is quite stupid. Yes, Orkut is an online "contact list" in my book and it does allow people to store and share personal information with others. Before all these incidents took place, people gushed over Orkut's usefulness to society at large and about how uplifting it was to find one's old, long-lost school or college-mates through it. I wasn't impressed then. Then when something horrible happened through such online contacts, the same people take a 180 degree turn in their stance and start howling in outrage. It's absolutely clear that the journalists who write about it now haven't a clue as to how to use the internet in the first place. Let's get this straight: people aren't forced to reveal private or intimate information about themselves in the first place. If a user is stupid enough or egoistic enough to share high resolution portrait snapshots, street address or phone numbers in user profiles, then nobody can guarantee his/her privacy or safety. The key here is that Orkut certainly doesn't require you to make such revelations. You *can* use all of Orkut's facilities without having to reveal an iota of personally identifiable trivia. Thirdly, Orkut does have privacy options which allow users to protect profile data from anybody else or reveal such info only to trusted "friends". Finally, using Orkut for really important or confidential communication is plain stupid and not recommended.

It's a no-brainer. Orkut is just a technological tool - a website that provides a service. I don't rate its service too highly nor do I see a lot of benefit from using it, but there are people who find it interesting and addictive. All power to them. At the same time, I would suggest that they also learn how to use Orkut effectively and safely. Parents should actually do their job and monitor their children's online activities rather than whine and moan about Orkut and ask for a total ban on the website. It's simply not feasible whichever way you look at it because *even* if Orkut is blocked effectively, there are hundreds of similar websites which provide similar services. How can any authority govern the Internet effectively and totally? It's simply impossible.

I think people should take a lot more responsibility for their own actions. Using public Internet space like a private playground is definitely not recommended and although the possible dangers of doing so are highly exaggerated by the media at times, the only information which you should post about yourself is what you would be 100% comfortable revealing to the whole world. Online social networking has made the process of establishing contacts a lot easier. It hasn't changed anything else about the way the world works. If you want to stay completely safe from the internet, just pull off the cable. It's that simple