Internet April Fools’ to surpass real April Fools’ for the first time in history

Cambridge University researchers are predicting that April Fools’ Day 2010 will be the first time that online pranks outnumber pranks in the so-called real world.

“We’re expecting to see 3,258,987 fake stories on the English-speaking worldwide web this April first,” Dr. Theodore Chiste. This will nearly than double the former record established on April 1, 1930, two months after the Whoopee Cushion was first released.

Dr. Chiste believes the most popular fake stories this year will involve Google, Facebook and/or Justin Bieber.

Who are we kidding?

As Paul Boutin wrote in the New York Times, “On the Internet, every day is April Fools’ Day.” The Onion has become one of the most popular sites in the world by turning fake stories into works of art.

To celebrate the Internet’s favorite holiday here three of our favorite  April Fools’ pranks:

1. The great Rickroll of 2008.
YouTube linked every video on its homepage to Rick Astley singing the most popular song of all time “Never Going to Give You Up.” The F-Secure Labs today announced our new product to protect against Rickroll, the F-Secure Rickroll Protector.

2. Sign o’ the times.
In 1980, the BBC reported that Big Ben was going digital. One in a fine tradition of BBC pranks.

3. But seriously, folks.
F-Secure introduces a new Internet security product featuring children’s story character Moomin. The best part? It was a real product released on April 1, 2005  but it was taken as a prank.

Other F-Secure Labs April Fools’ pranks include “Helsinki Lab Infected via Nintendo Wii” and “Unusual Banking Trojan Found.”

Did you have any favorite April Fools’ this year?

Cheers,
Hetta and Jason

More posts from this topic

Mikko Hypponen What Twitter knows

5 things Twitter knows about you

At Re:publica 2015, our Chief Research Officer Mikko Hypponen told the main stage crowd that the world's top scientists are now focused on the delivery of ads. "I think this is sad," he said. [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbF0sVdOjRw?rel=0&start=762&end=&autoplay=0] To give the audience a sense of how much Twitter knows about its users, he showed them the remarkable targeting the microblogging service offers its advertisers. If you use the site, you may be served promoted tweets based on the following: 1. What breakfast cereal you eat. 2. The alcohol you drink. 3. Your income. 4. If you suffer from allergies. 5. If you're expecting a child. And that's just the beginning. You can be targeted based not only on your recent device purchases but things you may be in the market for like, say, a new house or a new car. You can see all the targeting offered by logging into your Twitter, going to the top right corner of the interface, clicking on your icon and selecting "Twitter Ads". Can Twitter learn all this just based on your tweets and which accounts follow? No, Mikko said. "They buy this information from real world shops, from credit card companies, and from frequent buyer clubs." Twitter then connects this information to you based on... your phone number. And you've agreed to have this happen to you because you read and memorized the nearly 7,000 words in its Terms and Conditions. Because everyone reads the terms and conditions. Full disclosure: We do occasionally promote tweets on Twitter to promote or digital freedom message and tools like Freedome that block ad trackers. It's an effective tool and we find the irony rich. Part of our mission is to make it clear that there's no such thing as "free" on the internet. If you aren't paying a price, you are the product. Aral Balkan compares social networks to a creepy uncle" that pays the bills by listening to as many of your conversations as they can then selling what they've heard to its actual customers. And with the world's top minds dedicated to monetizing your attention, we just think you should be as aware of advertisers as they are as of you. Most of the top URLs in the world are actually trackers that you never access directly. To get a sense of what advertisers learn every time you click check out our new Privacy Checker. Cheers, Jason

May 15, 2015
BY 
nano freedome

A match made in digital heaven

When an enigmatic and groundbreaking artist started making waves on Youtube, the public was simultaneously curious and in awe of this new type of sonic assault, detached from any specific genre, culture or style. nano draws on life experience accumulated in NYC and Japan to create a truly global aesthetic. nano’s music transcends the confines of nationalities and ethnicities, and reflects nano’s “no national borders” motto. Despite being the product of a united and connected world, nano chooses to be shrouded with a veil of mystery and privacy. Like we here at Freedome, nano believes that personal privacy is a choice and the only person to control it should be YOU YOURSELF. We created Freedome because we LOVE the digital and connected world we all live in. We love it so much, that we want to give everyone the tools to enjoy it to the max by not having to worry about the negative sides that come with it. It’s all about choice and keeping control. A lot of your personal information is shared without your approval, and we should be able to share everything you want without fear of your stuff being stolen or used against you. Just like nano, we think that sharing your passions and keeping your privacy are not mutually exclusive. To celebrate our mutual  love for privacy and a connected world, nano has teamed up with Freedome with a special exclusive song, which can be found here. Join our global troop of digital freedom fighters. Your privacy, your choice.

April 22, 2015
BY 
sign license

POLL – How should we deal with harmful license terms?

We blogged last week, once again, about the fact that people fail to read the license terms they approve when installing software. That post was inspired by a Chrome extension that monetized by collecting and selling data about users’ surfing behavior. People found out about this, got mad and called it spyware. Even if the data collection was documented in the privacy policy, and they technically had approved it. But this case is not really the point, it’s just an example of a very common business model on the Internet. The real point is what we should think about this business model. We have been used to free software and services on the net, and there are two major reasons for that. Initially the net was a playground for nerds and almost all services and programs were developed on a hobby or academic basis. The nerds were happy to give them away and all others were happy to get them for free. But businesses run into a problem when they tried to enter the net. There was no reliable payment method. This created the need for compensation models without money. The net of today is to a significant part powered by these moneyless business models. Products using them are often called free, which is incorrect as there usually is some kind of compensation involved. Nowadays we have money-based payment models too, but both our desire to get stuff for free and the moneyless models are still going strong. So what do these moneyless models really mean? Exposing the user to advertising is the best known example. This is a pretty open and honest model. Advertising can’t be hidden as the whole point is to make you see it. But it gets complicated when we start talking targeted advertising. Then someone need to know who you are and what you like, to be able to show you relevant ads. This is where it becomes a privacy issue. Ordinary users have no way to verify what data is collected about them and how it is used. Heck, often they don’t even know under what legislation it is stored and if the vendor respects privacy laws at all. Is this legal? Basically yes. Anyone is free to make agreements that involve submitting private data. But these scenarios can still be problematic in several ways. They may be in conflict with national consumer protection and privacy laws, but the most common complaint is that they aren’t fair. It’s practically impossible for ordinary users to read and understand many pages of legalese for every installed app. And some vendors utilize this by hiding the shady parts of the agreement deep into the mumbo jumbo. This creates a situation where the agreement may give significant rights to the vendor, which the users is totally unaware of. App permissions is nice development that attempts to tackle this problem. Modern operating systems for mobile devices require that apps are granted access to the resources they need. This enables the system to know more about what the app is up to and inform the user. But these rights are just becoming a slightly more advanced version of the license terms. People accept them without thinking about what they mean. This may be legal, but is it right? Personally I think the situation isn’t sustainable and something need to be done. But what? There are several ways to see this problem. What do you think is the best option?   [polldaddy poll=8801974]   The good news is however that you can avoid this problem. You can select to steer clear of “free” offerings and prefer software and services you pay money for. Their business model is simple and transparent, you get stuff and the vendor get money. These vendors do not need to hide scary clauses deep in the agreement document and can instead publish privacy principles like this.   Safe surfing, Micke     Photo by Orin Zebest at Flickr

April 15, 2015
BY