By selling access to the data about what people spend, the transaction companies may provide an important first link between offline spending and online advertising opportunities. Although they are both at the exploratory phases of these information-sharing plans, the fact that they are being considered is making advertisers – and privacy advocates – take notice.

Linking ads to consumer behavior. Currently, online advertisements are linked directly to browsing behavior. Visa and MasterCard’s plans would offer advertisers the ability to display ads based on purchases that are made offline. For example, if a person uses a Visa card to buy fast food, that same person may be shown weight loss advertising later on when they browse online.

MasterCard and Visa do not issue credit cards, but rather handle the processing of transactions made with those cards. The transactions are relatively anonymous. Both companies collect the date, time, dollar value, merchant name and other spending behaviors – but the name and address of the cardholder do not appear. Visa processed 45 billion transactions in the year ending September 2010 and MasterCard processed approximately 23 billion.

MasterCard proposed an idea to ad executives that would sell the purchased attributes paired with names and addresses provided by a third-party company. The proposal was shared with at least four companies, but has been put aside for the time being. They are currently exploring a plan to sell the use of the anonymous aggregated data sorted into marketing segments.

However, MasterCard is now proposing a plan to sell marketers an analysis of anonymous, aggregated data sorted into marketing segments – people likely to be interested in international travel. Visa is pitching ability to use anonymous buying histories.

Both companies note that their plans are very preliminary, but they still raise many questions about anonymity from privacy advocates and other watchdog groups.

Partnering with Netflix for distribution of syndicated shows has proven to be profitable. Netflix purchased a four-year distribution deal with TimeWarner for $200,000 per episode to steam all 100 episodes of FX’s “Nip/Tuck.” It also created a similar deal with LionsGate to stream AMC’s “MadMen.” The deals are charting new, and potentially lucrative, territory for cable networks.

Netflix, along with Amazon On Demand and Hulu, is positioning itself as a solution to use old content in new ways. It is difficult for networks to sell syndication rights to other networks. With the rise in original programming on cable networks, Netflix deals could be a way for production companies to get more mileage from their original shows. There’s already a market for the content and media companies want to get the most revenue out of those shows.

However, despite the TimeWarner and LionsGate deals, some media executives are concerned that making Netflix more appealing will encourage more people to drop their cable service. In 2010, the total number of U.S. homes subscribing to a television service dipped for the first time since the introduction of cable television. If cable television numbers drop, the entire television business model could be changed or revamped.

The widespread appeal of smartphones, the promising sales of the iPad (and forthcoming Android-based tablets) and the advent of high speed Internet all make it possible for consumers to get media anywhere, everywhere and at anytime. However, even though the demand is growing and basic technology is there, experts estimate that it will take time for smart devices to be used by a majority of consumers.

Are those in the telecommunications industry ready to deliver what consumers are looking for?

That was the biggest question during the event and there are definite challenges to making content available on demand reliably. Despite the perceived problems for many manufacturers and media companies, the time to embrace smart technology is right now.

There are a few key factors that will help smart devices make the transition from luxury to household essential. First, there is a need for affordable devices and data services that are musts when it comes to mass-market penetration. Bandwidth is definitely an issue – streaming movies and television shows to multiple households will require a massive upgrade for many carriers. The negotiations for the right to air content over the new mediums is another factor because while many companies have embraced sharing their media on the Internet and through smart devices, there are other programmers that don’t include those rights.

Taking it slow. Samsung displayed its Smart TV, which allows consumers to watch regular cable and online content. Comcast is offering over 150,000 titles online to subscribers and other entertainment companies like DirectTV, Time Warner Cable, Cox, Verizon, AT&T and Cablevision are following suit.

Companies are wise to take things slow with implementation – especially because of the failed launch of Web TV in 1996. Experts estimate that because of this smart TVs and tablet entertainment won’t have widespread impact until 2015.

The company also made two rounds of layoffs in as many months. Compared to Google and Facebook, which are both hiring aggressively, Yahoo seems to be going in the wrong direction of a slow downward spiral.

Yahoo is also dealing with a weak profit projections for the current quarter, which resulted in a 2% drop in its stock. The company partnered with Bing to provide search engine results, while Yahoo concentrated on advertising and the look of the search engine. The former has paid off somewhat – in the fourth quarter Yahoo saw a 16% increase in display advertising revenue.

This performance factor alone won’t be enough to reverse Yahoo’s downward direction, but it is certainly a positive step in the right direction.

As personal electronics are striving to keep up with multimedia giant Apple, the world of computing and technology is reaching out for a more touching approach.

Touchscreens are now commonplace in the high-tech gadget market. You would be hard-pressed to find a phone, netbook or ATM that didn’t make use of the technology. Natural user interfaces have become all the rage as companies are responding to how people interact with the world around them.

Companies like Hewlett Packard and Microsoft have taken notice of the success of the iPhone and are quickly coming up with their own spin on the theme. The market is abuzz with companies frantically working on the next big thing in touchable devices.

Experts note that humans are more likely to interact with a device that makes use of their sense of touch and orientation. Humans are naturally drawn to holding things, touching them, and this is the secret to the success of touch-screen enabled devices.

Things like e-readers were first introduced to the dilemma of touch from their inception. The market quickly responded by setting out newer models with that were touchable.

People rushed to the new devices grabbing them up despite being several hundred dollars more than the non-touch models. Touch is here to stay, and for now, the tech world looks like a more touchy-feely place.

Digg came along and changed all of that. In a new digital world Digg set out to become the first news site dedicated to the wisdom of the crowd. Diggers, those who spend time reading and rating news stories on Digg.com, have transformed the site into a viable community. In some instances this power has translated to newer Diggers being shut out of appearing on the front page. Power Diggers were springing up making their impact felt all over the site. Digg’s front page began to look like a members-only affair, which is something that goes against what the company stands for.

However, Digg management has responded. A new updated look has surfaced, V4. It represents a critical change to the way Digg views itself as a company and how they want to change the way its users view the experience. The upgrade includes a visual overhaul as the look of that website that is geared toward web 2.0 standards. The power of the cloud is quite apparent when you go to Digg.com now. Crowdsourcing is still at the heart of this bustling network which hopes to entrench itself as an alternative to Facebook.

Some critics have come to question key changes to the Digg user experience, especially tools that allowed for Power Diggers to rate their performance. By removing certain metrics and focusing on the user experience as related to their social networks, Digg is moving onto the next phase of the Internet.

Will Digg be known as an also ran, standing in the virtual dust beside monolithic duds like MySpace and Orkut? Digg plans on being around to serve those who are still dedicated to the ideals behind curatorship and freedom of expression.

Plans will now be sold with limited data and a premium price on higher data usage. The changes will not affect current customers in good standing with unlimited plans.

While the change could mean lower rates for those customers who mainly use their connected devices for email and simple Web browsing, it could also mean much higher fees for more data-intense users. Streaming videos, downloading content or heavy use of sites like Twitter and Facebook could end up costing those users more.

Nationally, networks are fighting to manage a data explosion as more and more of the Internet becomes available on smarter and smarter devices that access it. Other carriers may follow suit, with Verizon indicating it may instill similar plans on its network.

AT&T does plan to give users tools to track their data usage including real-time apps to watch their usage, text message alerts to warn of pending new charges if data usage keeps up, and so forth.

Some users are up in arms over the changes and industry analysts are interested in how customers will react to the new changes. There will undoubtedly be a backlash, especially from the heaviest users, but most think that the problems will smooth over time as users realize how much (or how little) data they were really using.

Ninety-seven percent of Google’s revenue comes from advertising – that’s a staggering figure when you consider the company netted $23.7 billion last year.