Per Vices, The Rare YC ...

Y Combinator might be best known for software plays like Dropbox and Airbnb. But it’s also harbored a few hardware companies, notably the one that blew out Kickstarter funding records with Pebble Watch this month . There’s actually one more waiting in the wings. Per Vices is a startup from the latest class that’s looking to disrupt how wireless communications are sent. They’ve built a device called Phi that can interact with any wireless or radio signal. It’s a transceiver that can demodulate and process signal data up to 4 Gigahertz. In plain English, that means one of Per Vices’ devices can re-route your cell phone calls through your landline connection, if for example you have bad 3G service in your house. In theory, that means you could set up a decentralized wireless network where mobile devices and desktops are sending communications to each other instead of one where all mobile phones have to send and receive signals from carrier-operated cell phone towers. It’s a critical issue the industry needs to solve as data-hogging mobile subscribers eat into the profit margins of the carriers. For now, however, the company is focusing on the hacker and hobbyist market as the device is a PCI card that supports Linux machines. (So yes, that limits the current potential audience size). However, the longer-term goal is to build something that’s both accessible and affordable to the mainstream market. On their site, Phi retails for $666 for just the card or $750  with antennas, but the cost of producing it (as with many interesting hardware products) is getting lower every year. Comparable products from rivals like Ettus Research sell for $1,300 or higher . They’ve hacked a few demos with the product, including one where you can pick-up HDTV transmissions and watch shows on your phone or call a walkie talkie using your mobile phone. They’re hoping that hackers will find even more interesting ways of using the Phi, like how some developers figured out how to subvert Microsoft’s Kinect. Per Vices founders, Victor Wollesen and Yi Yao, are a physicist and an electrical engineer who used to work in the defense industry. But sales cycles there are endlessly long, so going the consumer route promises a faster time to market.

Rumor: Hulu Will Soon R...

If you love watching TV shows on Hulu but don’t have a cable subscription, things could get a bit more complicated in the near future. According to the New York Post , Hulu could soon start requiring its users to prove that they also have a cable or satellite subscription. This would obviously turn Hulu’s current business model on its head. It’s not clear how many of the service’s 31 million users currently don’t subscribe to cable TV, but chances are that the service’s audience would shrink after this move. Keep in mind, this is just a rumor for now, but it’s definitely worth keeping an eye on. It’s also not clear if this subscription requirement – assuming it is actually going to happen – will just apply to Hulu’s free service, or if it will also apply to Hulu Plus subscribers. Hulu Plus, which costs $7.99 per month, currently has somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million paying subscribers. Update : We just talked to a source close to Hulu. According to our source, Hulu and its content providers have talked about this move toward authentication since 2009. Our source noted that Hulu has no interest in being a first mover here and that a requirement for authentication is likely still a few years out. Hulu, however, does want to be a good partner and may have to give in to its partners’ pressure soon or later.  Even though an authentication requirement isn’t likely to happen right away, though, our source notes that what could happen relatively soon is that the content providers could require longer delays before their shows become available on the service for non-subscribers. Cable subscribers, under this model, would get access to a show on Hulu the next day, while non-subscribers would have to wait at least 30 days. This model would likely also apply to Hulu Plus subscribers. As our own Alexia Tsotsis noted last year when the FCC gave the go-ahead for the Comcast-NBC merger, it issued a number of specific rules to ensure that this merger wouldn’t influence Hulu’s operations. These rules, however, did not specifically touch upon any future provisions that would tie access to Hulu to a cable subscription. NBCUniversal, News Corporation, The Walt Disney Company and Providence Equity Partners currently share ownership of Hulu. There have been persistent rumors that Providence Equity Partners is looking to sell its stake in the company to the rest of the owners, though. The New York Post’s Claire Atkinson argues that this move toward an authentication model is one of the main reasons why Providence Equity Partners is trying to sell its stake in the company. We asked Hulu for a comment about these rumors and will update the story once/if we hear more. One group that has already commented on these rumors is Public Knowledge , a group that works to “preserve the openness of the Internet” and promotes “creativity through balanced copyright.” In a statement , the group’s president and CEO Gigi B. Sohn writes that “restricting access to legal content will only drive consumers to find illegal content. In particular, we are concerned about restricting access to TV programming available over free over-the-air broadcasting. It should be available online, regardless whether anyone subscribes to cable or satellite TV. By putting more restrictions on consumer access to popular content, the entertainment industry only removes any justification for stronger ‘anti-piracy’ laws it is perpetually seeking from Congress.”

Coca-Cola: The Cheering...

Here’s another great real-world campaign from Coca-Cola, ‘The Cheering Truck’. The brand’s well known red truck has been fitted with a recording booth and has been travelling all over Argentina collecting the cheers of football fans to support the Argentinean team. The truck drove through 19 provinces in Argentina, stopping in selected areas inviting fans Related Digital Buzz Posts: The Coca-Cola Happiness Truck Experiential Coca-Cola: Papertweetos 24h Coca-Cola + Maroon 5 Crowdsourcing Gig

Citi and LinkedIn Partn...

Citi and LinkedIn today launched a Citi-branded group on the professional networking site.

Google Gets Hit With Fi...

Google’s Street View is a very helpful tool when you’re driving to a place you’ve never visited before. But what are we willing to give up in return for the convenience? No one wants to pay in cash for the service, so how about you turn over your web history and email instead? More than a year ago, the FCC began an investigation about the data collected by Google’s Street View teams. It was learned that in addition to photographing an area, the happy little cars also scooped up data from unprotected wireless networks. Google has never denied the data collection, but they have had a variety of explanations. According to a report in the LA Times, Google first went with the theory that an “unauthorized engineer” put the plan in motion without permission from the company. The data was collected but no one did anything with it. Not so, says a recently released report by the FCC. They quote the engineer who worked on the project as saying, “We are logging user traffic along with sufficient data to precisely triangulate their position at a given time, along with information about what they were doing.” Google then said that yes, they collected the data but it was all perfectly legal. No problem then, said the FCC, let us see the data. Google refused and the FCC hit them with a $25,000 fine for obstructing their inquiry. Overall, the FCC report makes it pretty clear that many people at Google HQ new about the data collection but sidestepped the privacy concerns for a variety of reasons. One manager even said he pre-approved the proposal before it had been written, so he was unaware of the issues. Cause, yeah, that’s a great excuse for invasion of privacy — I signed off on a blank document. In the end, Google got off easy with a light (for them) fine and a black-eye that is already fading. But the question remains, how much of our privacy are we willing to give up in order to get better online tools, more targeted advertising and more relevant search results? As a marketer, you’re the person most likely to benefit from this kind of information gathering. Given that, do you think it’s okay for Google, or any company, to scoop up and review data from individuals without their permission? Or does privacy trump everything, especially profits?