Soon after the entire project was abandoned and the assets of WeLiveInPublic sold to a friend

Soon after, the entire project was abandoned and the assets of WeLiveInPublic sold to a friend of Harris’ for $100,000. The pal intends marketing camera and microphone kits to people who want try to living under web-cam surveillance for themselves. If there are any so foolish out there.”Josh’s thing is to be there first and do it first,” Salzano of INTV said this week “But it’s creepy to live in 24 hour surveillance like that. Josh is the master of exhibitionism and voyeurism but I think it weirded even him out a little bit.” Before leaving for California, Harris put the loft on the market. Friends said he was afraid even to go back inside it, so depressing was his experience.Harris has sent out word that he has no plans barring perhaps, something to do with films. Then he may retire hurt to his apple farm in upstate New York. Only if you think the internet age is over are you likely to believe that Josh Harris is over He is a man who needs an audience He will not find it in an orchard..

It was a Thursday afternoon exactly a month ago when the finance director of e-district started on a trail of discovery that would ultimately lead to the UK’s biggest dot scandal. It was a Thursday afternoon exactly a month ago when the finance director of e-district started on a trail of discovery that would ultimately lead to the UK’s biggest dot scandal.
Eddie Abrams was working in the company’s offices in Harrow, north London, trying to track down an unpaid bill for £500,000 which was apparently due from 24/7, a media agency that was contracted to sell advertising space on e-district’s key website, LeisureDistrict. But the 29-year-old Mr Abrams noticed that something was wrong. Either e-district was selling advertising on its website too cheaply for the user figures it was delivering, or its user figures were wrong.Mr Laitman took the bill to Steven Laitman, e-district’s founder and chief executive. Mr Laitman dealt personally with the advertising sales agencies and should, Mr Abrams thought, be able to explain the anomaly. Why had this bill not been paid by 24/7? And who was going to chase it up? These are just two of the questions that would have been asked.It must have been a difficult conversation as e-district was Mr Laitman’s creation.

The 39-year-old former computer programmer had founded the business four years previously after selling his interests in a computer call centre operation for around £1.5m. He was central to all of its operations and it was his idea to launch a “community” site aimed at 16-35-year-olds that would be available on interactive television as well as via PCs.Mr Abrams was clearly not satisfied with the answers he received from his chief executive and took the bill to Frank Lewis, e-district’s 55-year-old chairman.Mr Lewis acted quickly. He informed e-district’s advisers by lunchtime on Friday 16 March about the need for a statement to the stock exchange where e-district was listed on the Aim market for smaller companies. The board, excluding Mr Laitman, held a meeting in Harrow over the weekend and by Sunday the need for immediate action was clear.Mr Lewis and another board member visited Mr Laitman in hospital in North London where he was undergoing routine tests for a heart problem that had required surgery in 1999. Though the nature of the conversation is not known, it is clear the board members were not satisfied with Mr Laitman’s explanation for the missing money.

They immediately suspended him and prepared for a statement to be made to the Stock Exchange on the Monday morning.The statement was calamitous. It admitted that key trading figures such as the registered user numbers, the numbers of page impressions and revenues may have been “substantially overstated”. The company’s shares were suspended pending a full inquiry.Events then developed rapidly. Mr Laitman was sacked by e-district which also launched a legal action against him alleging fraudulent misrepresentation and breaches of fiduciary duty. The company won a court order to freeze up to £10m of Mr Laitman’s assets pending a court case.Then it got worse. A statement earlier this week showed that a substantial amount of e-district’s revenues that had been booked as coming from advertising agencies had in fact been arriving from bank accounts linked to Mr Laitman.