Ohanian’s grueling tour across North America is meant to inspire students to start their own companies and offer the advice that he wished to have received at university. While at the University of Virginia as an undergrad, he was on track to be an immigration lawyer and obsessed about his GPA. During a LSAT prep course, he walked out to get waffles. While eating, he realized, “If I want these waffles more than I want to be a lawyer, I probably shouldn’t be a lawyer.”

Determined to start a company (and live like college students forever) Ohanian and his friend Steve Huffman tried to create a mobile ordering company called My Mobile Menu, or MMM. During spring break in their senior year, Ohanian and Huffman traveled from their homes in Virginia to Boston to see the then-unknown Paul Graham (who is now one of the hottest names in tech) talk about his new startup incubator, an organization that provides resources for new companies, called Y Combinator. Ohanian and Huffman pitched MMM to the new incubator only to find out that they were rejected later in the evening. Luckily, Y Combinator liked them so much that they called back to see if they could come up with a better idea. Ohanian remembers how rocky the first days in the incubator were: “We had no fucking idea what we were doing.”

Huffman and Ohanian stumbled upon an idea about creating a news aggregation website, where users would submit links and vote to determine their overall rank on the main page. The first version was “janky,” a word used by Ohanian to mean embarrassingly awful. With some coding and bit of luck, their user base increased. It grew from the two co-founders submitting links under different pseudonyms to about 10,000 users in four months.

“If I want these waffles more than I want to be a lawyer, I probably shouldn’t be a lawyer.”

Ohanian recalls how he and Huffman were summoned to Silicon Valley, “a magical land of unicorns and term sheets,” by a Yahoo executive. When talking about their internet traffic, the Yahoo executive condescendingly told them that reddit’s number was equivalent to a rounding error of Yahoo’s traffic. The meeting they thought would validate them as a real internet company went terribly, and Ohanian became determined to prove the unnamed executive wrong; he placed the quote on his wall. It became the wall of negative reinforcement.

Ohanian and Huffman increased their traffic to over 70,000 daily visitors and eventually sold reddit to Condé Nast, a mass media company, for an undisclosed sum in 2006, 18 months after launch. After his retelling of the reddit story, an updated version of the ‘inventors in a garage’ myth, he transitioned to how he believes that the future will belong to the creators. “[The internet] is the largest stage and library in one,” Ohanian told the crowd. He continued to explain that the ability to code will allow anyone with a laptop and internet connection to create a small empire – just as he and Huffman did with reddit.

Ohanian’s talk was filled with funny inspirational quotes such as, “It’s okay if you suck, because sucking is the first step of being sort of good at something.” He also explained that an essential ingredient to starting a business is the will to do it. With the cost of starting a business decreasing and the internet expanding, Ohanian encouraged everyone to venture forth and create a business. Statistics show a much more dismal picture, with around 75 to 90 per cent of startups failing. Y Combinator, the incubator from which Ohanian graduated, admits to a 93 per cent failure rate – a statistic not mentioned in his talk. Throughout his 45-minute pep rally, Ohanian enthusiastically spoke about all the ‘cool’ aspects of startups, but did not mention any of the hardships or downsides. In the end, it was another inspirational talk that told the audience exactly what they wanted to hear.

The last thought Ohanian left the audience with was that a person will always play their hardest in a video game when they have no more lives left. He encouraged students to try out their ideas and not to worry when they had no idea what they are doing. Ohanian ended the talk by saying, “The shoulders of giants that we stood on were pretty damn big, but the shoulders of the giants that you all get to stand on are even bigger.”

The post Give a damn, give a lot of damns appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Bill C-13 makes it a crime to knowingly share intimate images of a person without explicit consent for distribution from the subject. According to Member of Parliament Charmaine Borg, New Democratic Party (NDP) Critic for Digital Issues, “[This clause is] widely supported from all sides of the house regardless of the party colour […] but the main problem with this bill is that there are only three pages on cyberbullying and the rest is essentially about lawful access.”

The problems opponents have with Bill C-13 are that it lowers the threshold to obtain access to personal information, and eliminates the checks-and-balances that keep Internet Service Providers (ISPs) – such as Bell and Rogers – from voluntarily providing private information to the authorities.

The bill proposes to lower the threshold to obtain warrants from “reasonable grounds to believe” to “reasonable grounds to suspect” for specific production orders such as tracking data or transmission data. The burden for “proof to suspect” means that a law enforcement agency simply needs to suspect a person has committed, or will commit, a crime. The argument for lowering the burden is that transmission data is not invasive and a lower burden to receive a warrant is justified. “This type of information in relation to which a person has a lower expectation of privacy is often collected at the beginning of an investigation before police develop reasonable grounds to believe an offense has or will be committed,” explains Justice Canada spokesperson, Carole Saindon. Yet, the metadata being targeted is not well defined in the bill, and depending on a judge’s interpretation, may include anything from routing information on a call to your internet history.

“[This clause is] widely supported from all sides of the house regardless of the party colour […] but the main problem with this bill is that there are only three pages on cyberbullying and the rest is essentially about lawful access”

Despite politicians’ defense that what they are collecting is “just metadata,” there is a great amount about one’s private life that can be learned through this information. German politician Malte Spitz demonstrated the power of metadata to track one’s daily life by releasing six months worth of data to the public, showing that detailed information – like where he slept, who he called, what cities he travelled to – could be easily accessed.

Currently, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) governs the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information by private sector organizations. In general, personal information can only be disclosed with the consent of the individual; however, under certain circumstances, such as under the organization’s own initiative or in emergency situations, ISPs can share personal information (such as an address linked to an IP) with law enforcement agencies without the individual’s consent.

Current law states that even though the ISP can voluntarily disclose personal information to the police, they are still liable for damages if the person was innocent, however, Bill C-13 gives ISPs legal immunity to reveal their users’ personal information. “By taking out this whole liability aspect, you are really just encouraging this whole backdoor of personal information going into the hands of police officers without there being probable cause,” says Borg.

Despite these increased powers of surveillance, it is unlikely that cyberbullying will be prevented. According to Shaheen Shariff, an associate professor at McGill whose research focuses on bullying and cyberbullying, “Bringing in laws may not really solve the problems as there is a spectrum of these types of behaviours that go from mild to extreme.” Shariff believes that implementing a set of laws that criminalize bullying will be difficult to accomplish because of the diverse nature of the issue in question.

“By taking out this whole liability aspect, you are really just encouraging this whole backdoor of personal information going into the hands of police officers without there being probable cause”

The pervasiveness, ease of distribution, and number of social networks on the internet allow bullies to harass people no matter where they are. Putting numbers on cyberbullying or bullying is difficult as people define and experience it differently. Shariff notes that teachers rarely think there is a problem with cyberbullying at their school even though many students have admitted to having experienced it. Shariff says that teachers and administrators are not aware of a problem because students who are bullied often avoid reporting to authorities due to the belief that the situation will get worse if they do, a lack of confidence that adults will be able to respond to the problem, or a fear that their digital privileges may get taken away.

Cyberbullying laws may allow police to deal with the worst forms of cyberbullying, though at the risk of limiting the protection of citizens’ information. Bill C-13’s additional clauses are unlikely to solve cyberbullying, provide a way to lower the burden of obtaining a warrant and reduce the checks-and-balances needed to keep ISPs from sharing our personal data. Laws cannot be updated quickly enough to deal with the new challenges that technology creates. As more people spend more time online and as telecommunication information becomes richer, online privacy should be tightened and not loosened.

The post Bullying 2.0 appeared first on The McGill Daily.

A typical bootcamp lasts about two to three months and costs anywhere from $7,000 to $12,000. Students immerse themselves in an intensive training program where they are taught programming skills through tutorials and hands-on projects. Bootcamp programs are demanding – students typically commit to 40 hours a week of class and another 20 to 40 hours per week for side projects. All this work promises a much -desired reward: employment. Bitmaker Labs, a bootcamp in Toronto, boasts that over 85 per cent of its graduates find a job or begin their own startup within a month of graduating.

Tory Jarmain, a co-founder of Bitmaker Labs, told The Daily that because “there are more web development positions open than developers,” bootcamps are becoming a popular way to teach people to code. Though other options such as free online coding schools and university programs are available, Jarmain believes that, “A huge advantage exists in skill training with other people and that learning to code does not need a four-year commitment.” With the lack of specializations in web development in higher education and the increasing demand for people with coding abilities, the demand for talent is far outstripping supply.

Bootcamps are also a way for companies to recruit skilled people other than computer science graduates – such as people looking to make a career change or demographics underrepresented in technology. At HackerYou, a Toronto bootcamp, 70 per cent of the classes are comprised of women. The founder, Heather Payne, who is also a founder of the not-for-profit Ladies Learning Code, told The Daily that bootcamps “accelerate the career of anyone who already wanted to be a web developer.”

“[Some] fell behind and were not at the caliber they thought they would be at the end.”

Bootcamps advertise the ability to teach people of all skill levels to code, though they are largely tailored toward those who want to start their own venture or become professional web developers. However, both the interviewed alumni expressed similar opinions that the initial differences in coding ability, combined with hard work, quickly stratifies the students into high-achievers and those who get left behind.

Unlike conventional education systems, which have formal regulation and evaluation systems, bootcamps operate free from wide-reaching structure or oversight. In Ontario, vocational programs that cost more than $1,000, and are more than 40 hours in length, may be subject to investigation or registration with the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (MTCU). Earlier this year, the MTCU investigated Bitmaker Labs on the grounds that it was operating as an unregistered school, causing Bitmaker to put its program on hold. Bitmaker Labs eventually received a legal exemption, but without regulation it is hard to evaluate the promotional claims made by bootcamps.

Ashley Beattie, a graduate from Bitmaker Labs in winter 2013, had an overwhelmingly positive experience, and has since started a company called Kiwi Wearable Technologies. He went into the program with previous coding knowledge and was able to ‘get it’ after six weeks of the course. “After you write 10,000 lines of code you are well on your way to being a successful programmer,” Beattie told the Daily. But he emphasized that this was not the case for everyone: “[Some] fell behind and were not at the caliber they thought they would be at the end.” Beattie knew that he wanted to be an entrepreneur going into this program and was able to use his experience at Bitmaker to eventually start Kiwi Wearable Technologies.

Bootcamps advertise the ability to teach people of all skill levels to code, though they are largely tailored toward those who want to start their own venture or become professional web developers.

The Daily spoke with another recent alumni from a Canadian bootcamp (which she chose not to name) who did not have such a positive experience. According to Jennifer*, “[It was] unfair because the bootcamp increased the class size to almost double what was promised, it unexpectedly shut down for a few days halfway through, and it lacked a well thought-out structured curriculum.” She went on to say that, “The program had internal conflicts and the teachers, students, [and] organizers did not share the same teaching philosophy.” She referred to the stressful learning environment, frustration in the difficulty of understanding concepts, and the lack of guidance as reasons the bootcamp did not live up to her expectations. “The program worked well for some but not for me,” Jennifer admitted to The Daily.

Bootcamps can generally provide a relatively quick and effective method for people to learn to code with high employment rates – making it an attractive option for those who are hoping to learn highly marketable skills. Still, this stressful and condensed environment does not work for all. To really thrive in this environment, some previous knowledge of programming is generally required. The lack of transparency and the variable quality of courses implies high stakes for students who are investing large sums of money.

*name has been changed

The post A rockstar programmer in nine weeks? appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Apps have risen in popularity over the last few years mainly due to the increased capability and lowered prices of some smartphones. Scalable cloud computing services reduced the cost and hassle of hosting and open-source tools. Libraries also decreased the amount of time needed for development. The recession reduced the chances of getting a job, liberating many people’s free time. There has also been an increase in start-up accelerators such as Y Combinator, 500 Startups, and Montreal’s FounderFuel, whose month-long boot camps are designed to help small (mainly software) businesses succeed, and hopefully create the next big thing. All these factors create an environment with an increasing number of solutions to a decreasing number of problems.

The app market is notoriously tough, and you need some luck to succeed if you are not a big name. About half of all app revenues are made by just 25 gaming and entertainment companies such as Rovio, Zynga, and Electronic Arts. With that in mind, The Daily talked to a few foolhardy app companies in Montreal on how they are attempting to make a splash in the ever growing pool of the app industry.

Kutoto is an app designed to create a marketplace to get tasks done locally and by trusted people. This app provides a digital space where people can post and bid on services such as: cleaning an apartment, a lift to the airport, or fixing a sink. Julien Cassis, a McGill graduate who co-founded Kutoto, told The Daily that he chose to develop this app because he believes apps are poised to become more location specific, always on you, and simple to use.

Kutoto is not unique and is competing head-to-head with other apps such as Bidzy, Zaarly, Thumbtack, Redbeacon, eBayHire, Angie’s List, TaskRabbit, Exec, and many more.  After about a year of running the app the founders realized that the majority of sales were driven by cleaning homes, so Kutoto did what is called a ‘pivot’ in start-up lingo. A pivot is when a company changes its main business strategy to a different one, in this case cleaning tasks, instead of persevering with their original business model. They now have around 200 users and Cassis remains optimistic on Kutoto’s future.

After hearing that a friend’s cherished bike got stolen, Alex Petraki – another McGill graduate – decided to set up an app to help prevent bike theft called BikeWatch. Bike thefts are common in Montreal, with more than 2,500 bikes lifted each year. However, police estimate the actual number is likely higher as people sometimes do not report the thefts. Petraki first tried to simplify the process of filing a stolen bike report with the Service de police de la ville de Montréal (SPVM), but hit a roadblock with their internal policies. So instead, he made BikeWatch as an app to let bike owners in Montreal know when a member of their community had their bike stolen. The goal is to have other cyclists act as lookouts for a stolen bike, monitor dangerous locations, and take stock of their bikes. It also acts as a social media platform where people can sell bikes or parts and exchange messages. BikeWatch has roughly 1,000 users; no word on if it has caught any thieves yet.

The next app looked at had a bit more traction and was OOHLALA, an app to connect and enhance your campus life. This app is used by students to manage hectic academic and social lives, in order to get the most out the university years. We sat down with Danial Jameel, one of the co-founders and a University of Toronto graduate, who decided to centre his company in Montreal because of its student density. This is Jameel’s third startup, and OOHLALA grew out of one of his previous projects – a website designed to offer discounts to students from local merchants. After working with student councils he realized a disconnect between how the University distributes information and how students actually get it. Today’s information is fragmented and instant, and this app was created to help collect all this information from personal schedules, club events, social activities, and friends’ availabilities into one dashboard. OOHLALA now operates on over 50 campuses across Canada and the United States, with their strongest presence in Toronto and Montreal. It is popular among first-year students, as one in four at the University of Toronto and McGill are trying it out.

Only about one in ten start-ups survive, and the back pages of an app store are becoming a graveyard of unused apps. Even those chosen by tech experts don’t always succeed. FounderFuel, a highly selective local Montreal accelerator, had 30 per cent of the companies that successfully completed their boot camps in Fall 2011 and Spring 2012 go out of business.

Of the 100 billion apps that are downloaded each year, many are tried once and then forgotten.  For an app to stay relevant, it needs to provide something different from the million other apps that are a click away. Yet the reality is that most apps are repetitive and do not provide effective solutions to any real problems. Only time will tell if these Montreal apps have what it takes to go up against the giants.

The post An app for everything appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Instead of an apple, Professor Schwarcz recalls how a student once placed an extremely large strawberry on his desk and told him to witness the effects of genetically modified food. The student expressed concern about Genetically Modified (GM) foods and told him how an anti-freeze gene from an Arctic fish was spliced into a strawberry to create an unnatural abomination of nature.

But in actuality, strawberries are not a current GM crop and there have been no documented cases of scientists splicing fish genes into strawberries. Instead, like most of our food, strawberries have been intentionally cross-bred and tweaked by farmers for thousands of years to select for certain desirable traits, such as resistance to disease. With today’s technology we are now able to use recombinant DNA, which is a DNA sequence that does not naturally occur, and splice it into a seed to create a new variation of an existing plant. However, consumers’ lack of knowledge can lead them to categorize this selective breeding technology under the label of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), a still-controversial technology in many areas of the world.

In the 2012 American election, California held a referendum vote on Proposition 37, which would require all GM food sold to consumers to be labelled as such. The motion barely failed but it did demonstrate how voters feel uncomfortable about their food being modified. The belief that GM foods are harmful has led countries such as Germany, Japan, Greece and others to limit their use and cultivation. During a famine, Zambia refused GM food aid from the United States for fear of the alleged long-term effects to humans as well as the possibility of cross-contaminating local crops which would make them ineligible for export to certain E.U. countries. The myth that GM foods endanger lives is influencing governments to support regulations that hurt the people growing the crops as well as those eating them. But this fear isn’t justified, explains Professor Schwarcz, as multiple scientific studies over the last 25 years about GM foods have yet to demonstrate any health concerns over its consumption. GM foods also cannot be sold to the public on a whim, as the approval process is quite thorough; the introduction of canola, for example, took about 12 years to reach the market.

Some myths, like the “GM foods are dangerous,” are physically harmless – though they do have wide-ranging political impacts – while others, especially in the realm of health, can have more direct effects. Some health misconceptions can be laughably harmless, such as the idea that placing sliced onions in a room can stop the common cold. The reasoning behind this onion myth is that the sliced onion acts as a bacteria magnet, drawing away the bacteria that cause the common cold. Just as in the strawberry myth, the facts are wrong. The common cold  is caused by a virus and cultivating bacteria in an onion bowl is not a good way to kill a pathogen. But whereas things like “an apple a day” may not harm (though also not help), there are branches of alternative medicine that can tangiblly harm.

Professor Schwarcz tells us how homeopathy, a particular branch of alternative medicine, represents a charlatan’s rouse that, at best, gives false hope to the ill and, at worst, reduces the time that traditional medicine has to cure them. Homoeopathy seduces its adherents with the premise that complicated diseases can be reduced to simple explanations and solutions. Homeopathic practitioners may believe that their methods actually work when a customer feels better in spite of their treatment rather than because of it. As Professor Schwarcz puts it, people that sell homoeopathic remedies can be tricked into thinking their medicine works because a dissatisfied customer does not return; they either die or go seek medical treatment. Doctors are not under this illusion as they tend to hear back more often if a type of treatment isn’t working. Even though homoeopathy has been discredited, there are still some people who continue to buy its medicines.

The area of medicine is one in which the public seems particularly susceptible to myths. In 1998 a paper was published by Andrew Wakefield that claimed the vaccine against measles, mumps, and rubella caused an increased risk of autism. This author was found to be fraudulent, had undisclosed conflicts of interests, and was disciplined by the General Medical Council for professional misconduct. But the myth that the vaccination can cause autism still exists today and has convinced some parents to not vaccinate their children from life-threatening diseases. As a result, several cities, including Montreal, have had several measles outbreaks within the last decade because not enough people were vaccinated. The reason that myths such as “vaccination causes autism” do not go away is because it gives people false hope that a simple action can prevent a chance occurrence from happening.

The typical person cannot be expected to know all the trade-offs of new technologies; as a result, society must place more and more importance on scientists to tell the truth. But there are other forces at play that can confuse the situation. As more research is done and more papers are published, there are more people who support every side of an argument. Alarmists can cherrypick the literature to give credence to any idea, regardless of the understanding of the vast majority of the scientific community. With billions of dollars on the line, companies fund their favoured side and help to create confusion among the public. The rise of scientific opinions is increased by the rise of celebrity science which introduces new opinions without objective support. “As-seen-on-TV” science and shocking media stories only create confusion when not placed into proper context, says Professor Fenster, and leads the public to believe there is a debate in the scientific community when there isn’t.

Myths are started and sustained with fraudulent or misinterpreted science, but those who care about these issues, such as public policy makers, should look beyond the popular consensus to find truth. As for the public, we would all do well to think about – and maybe question – the explanation rather than the headline.

The post Teach a man a myth and you fool him for a lifetime appeared first on The McGill Daily.