http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/08/08/air.car/index.html
European researchers are currently working on designing a car that can get 106 miles per gallon. The concept backing this car’s inception is similar to how steam locomotives are powered. The difference: the car would run on compressed air rather than steam.
The plan for the car includes six seats and is able to reach over 90 miles per hour. The car would also have a range of over 800 miles per tank because of the dual energy motor. Anything under 35 miles per hour, the car would run on compressed air only. Fuel would be needed to power the car to its fullest potential and for anything above 35 miles per hour. The first car in the United States is said to be available in 2010. The price tag is less than $18,000.
The design of the car would also be made as lightly as possible. The body would be built with fiberglass and foam. The chassis would be constructed of aluminum and glued together than traditionally welded.
Skeptics have their criticisms though. The main one being its fuel efficiency claims. Critics believe the mileage is ‘at the edge of possibility’ and it is a great leap to claim that a car will get double the mileage as the Toyota Prius.
I am all for anything that will save us from the current or worsening fuel crises. Maybe this is the one design that makes that possible. Back in 2006 there were some ‘breakthrough’ discoveries that old vegetable cooking oil would be our saving grace to gas. The only problem here is the inconvenience of converting your diesel vehicle or even using it. That has not gone very far since its inception.
One thing I worry about with the ‘lightest possible body’ of the car is its safety. How can something glued together be safer than/as safe as the car’s that are made of metal and welded together? Will they even pass crash tests?
I am rooting for the people that will make this possible. It seems to be a nice concept, so I hope it becomes a reality. If not this exact design, maybe someone will be inspired and work from there.
Reference: http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/21/news/economy/vegetable_cars/index.htm
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Reporters Cause Controversy at Hacking Conference -- Journal 14 - August 10, 2008
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/08/08/reporters.hacking.ap/index.html
Thousands of hackers met last week in Las Vegas, Nevada at the Black Hat convention. Of those thousands, three were caught hacking the hackers’ convention. Dominique Jouniot, Marc Brami, Mauro Israel were all kicked out of the convention and will even lose their partnerships with Black Hat.
The organizers of the Black Hat convention warned attendees that the conference’s public wireless access was being monitored by hackers. But that did not stop the three. The three were only caught when they tried to get others to post the stolen information on the Wall of Sheep, a forum designed to embarrass security professionals who don't follow proper security procedures themselves. The workers declined and reported him, but the three said they did it “educate the press about the importance of sending data securely”.
Forbes Magazine is reporting that the hackers used a form known as ‘sniffing’. Packet sniffers detect information sent across networks and can gather either all information sent or only certain queues that match what they are looking for. Detecting packet sniffers is not an easy task either.
I find it so interesting that the ‘hackers’ convention was hacked itself. It is also a little misleading to call it such. Black Hat features an annual technical information security conference in which helps to define the coming year’s security headlines and concerns.
I understand that the three hackers broke the law (possibly criminal law as well) but why would Black Hat not want to learn where they went wrong? If their own network was easily hacked, it seems to me they should be working with the three hackers to see how they did it. From public opinion, I do not know if I would look at Black Hat the same. They could not even secure their networks enough to keep three reporters from hacking it.
References:
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2008/08/08/black-hat-conference-tech-security-cz_tb_0808blackhat.html
http://netsecurity.about.com/cs/hackertools/a/aa121403.htm
Thousands of hackers met last week in Las Vegas, Nevada at the Black Hat convention. Of those thousands, three were caught hacking the hackers’ convention. Dominique Jouniot, Marc Brami, Mauro Israel were all kicked out of the convention and will even lose their partnerships with Black Hat.
The organizers of the Black Hat convention warned attendees that the conference’s public wireless access was being monitored by hackers. But that did not stop the three. The three were only caught when they tried to get others to post the stolen information on the Wall of Sheep, a forum designed to embarrass security professionals who don't follow proper security procedures themselves. The workers declined and reported him, but the three said they did it “educate the press about the importance of sending data securely”.
Forbes Magazine is reporting that the hackers used a form known as ‘sniffing’. Packet sniffers detect information sent across networks and can gather either all information sent or only certain queues that match what they are looking for. Detecting packet sniffers is not an easy task either.
I find it so interesting that the ‘hackers’ convention was hacked itself. It is also a little misleading to call it such. Black Hat features an annual technical information security conference in which helps to define the coming year’s security headlines and concerns.
I understand that the three hackers broke the law (possibly criminal law as well) but why would Black Hat not want to learn where they went wrong? If their own network was easily hacked, it seems to me they should be working with the three hackers to see how they did it. From public opinion, I do not know if I would look at Black Hat the same. They could not even secure their networks enough to keep three reporters from hacking it.
References:
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2008/08/08/black-hat-conference-tech-security-cz_tb_0808blackhat.html
http://netsecurity.about.com/cs/hackertools/a/aa121403.htm
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Futuristic Fashions Will Fight Our Health Scares -- Journal 13 - August 10, 2008
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/08/04/intelligent.clothing/index.html
Can you imagine clothes that could prevent the flu or any other illnesses? Now imagine never having to wash them. Researchers in England are experimenting with technology that would make it possible for our clothes to detect so much more about our body before we could. Everything is being considered: workout gear that detects the amount a person sweats; underwear that detects cancer cells. Nothing is too far-fetched. Researchers even believe that one day humans will wear clothes that have built-in cooling, deodorant, moisturizers, and vitamins.
One breakthrough study has revealed technology placed in a bra that can detect breast cancer at the earliest possible time. It tracks an increase in blood flow rates, a common sign when tumors grow, and alerts the bra wearer. The only drawback: some say that an increase in blood flow can happen for a lot of different reasons. It can be caused by benign tumors or cysts, so it may cause some false alarms.
A little over a year ago, Forbes Magazine produced an article about ‘smart clothes’. Their definition was a little less intriguing. ‘Smart’ clothes only one year ago were defined as jeans that had an iPod docking station built in or clothing that could protect the wearer from ultraviolet rays. It is amazing to see how far we have come in only one year.
The new technological advances in clothing are things I could have never imagined in the past. It is so interesting to think where we may be with all technological advances by the year 2020. Clothes, an item everyone wears, seems to be one of the most practical places to begin researching. As one researcher said, they are the mediator between our bodies and the environment. It only makes sense that we design them to tell us much as much about our bodies as possible.
Reference: http://www.forbes.com/2007/03/19/hightech-function-clothing-forbeslife-cx_hp_0320smartclothes.html
Can you imagine clothes that could prevent the flu or any other illnesses? Now imagine never having to wash them. Researchers in England are experimenting with technology that would make it possible for our clothes to detect so much more about our body before we could. Everything is being considered: workout gear that detects the amount a person sweats; underwear that detects cancer cells. Nothing is too far-fetched. Researchers even believe that one day humans will wear clothes that have built-in cooling, deodorant, moisturizers, and vitamins.
One breakthrough study has revealed technology placed in a bra that can detect breast cancer at the earliest possible time. It tracks an increase in blood flow rates, a common sign when tumors grow, and alerts the bra wearer. The only drawback: some say that an increase in blood flow can happen for a lot of different reasons. It can be caused by benign tumors or cysts, so it may cause some false alarms.
A little over a year ago, Forbes Magazine produced an article about ‘smart clothes’. Their definition was a little less intriguing. ‘Smart’ clothes only one year ago were defined as jeans that had an iPod docking station built in or clothing that could protect the wearer from ultraviolet rays. It is amazing to see how far we have come in only one year.
The new technological advances in clothing are things I could have never imagined in the past. It is so interesting to think where we may be with all technological advances by the year 2020. Clothes, an item everyone wears, seems to be one of the most practical places to begin researching. As one researcher said, they are the mediator between our bodies and the environment. It only makes sense that we design them to tell us much as much about our bodies as possible.
Reference: http://www.forbes.com/2007/03/19/hightech-function-clothing-forbeslife-cx_hp_0320smartclothes.html
Friday, August 1, 2008
A Means for Publishers to Put a Newspaper in Your Pocket -- Journal 12 - August 3, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/28/technology/28verve.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
As everything shifts to web media and electronic resources, the newspaper industry has really begun to suffer. Verve Wireless believes it has the solution. It offers newspaper publishers the chance to deliver newspapers to users’ cell phones, a technology that most companies are beginning to use.
Verve Wireless currently offers 4,000 mobile versions of the newspaper from 140 different publishers. The Associate Press is one of Verve’s largest customers right now with $3 million invested in the company. They believe this could be the answer to the newspaper’s struggling business.
These mobile companies are also trying to persuade advertisers to jump in on the action. According to Verve, their software can tailor ads to each individual subscriber rather than bombarding them with all types of ads. They can better segment the market by offering targeted ads. For example, Verve says it could deliver an ad about the bar scene to people ages 21-30 who live downtown.
I believe that newspapers delivered to cell phones are a great idea for several reasons. For subscribers, the news is made ready at the tips of their fingers with ads targeted at their interests. It may also help to revive the newspaper industry. For example, in 2006, a report from the Census Bureau said that Americans would spend more time with their TV than with their newspaper. In fact, the newspaper ranked only above magazines, books, and video games. Everything before it consisted of electronic media.
Cell phone newspapers also cut down on wasted paper that Americans may or may not recycle. I am a huge fan of recycling and unfortunately most people find it more convenient to just throw it out. Some subscribers do not even open the paper once they receive it; they merely have a subscription just to have one.
Think about if we could reduce the amount of trees we cut down and waste for in-print newspapers. Most of the information contained in the newspaper is already hosted on the newspapers’ website for free. Why not put more time and resources into enhancing our electronic media for newspapers?
Reference: http://www.lostremote.com/2006/12/15/web-now-exceeds-newspaper-use-in-us/
As everything shifts to web media and electronic resources, the newspaper industry has really begun to suffer. Verve Wireless believes it has the solution. It offers newspaper publishers the chance to deliver newspapers to users’ cell phones, a technology that most companies are beginning to use.
Verve Wireless currently offers 4,000 mobile versions of the newspaper from 140 different publishers. The Associate Press is one of Verve’s largest customers right now with $3 million invested in the company. They believe this could be the answer to the newspaper’s struggling business.
These mobile companies are also trying to persuade advertisers to jump in on the action. According to Verve, their software can tailor ads to each individual subscriber rather than bombarding them with all types of ads. They can better segment the market by offering targeted ads. For example, Verve says it could deliver an ad about the bar scene to people ages 21-30 who live downtown.
I believe that newspapers delivered to cell phones are a great idea for several reasons. For subscribers, the news is made ready at the tips of their fingers with ads targeted at their interests. It may also help to revive the newspaper industry. For example, in 2006, a report from the Census Bureau said that Americans would spend more time with their TV than with their newspaper. In fact, the newspaper ranked only above magazines, books, and video games. Everything before it consisted of electronic media.
Cell phone newspapers also cut down on wasted paper that Americans may or may not recycle. I am a huge fan of recycling and unfortunately most people find it more convenient to just throw it out. Some subscribers do not even open the paper once they receive it; they merely have a subscription just to have one.
Think about if we could reduce the amount of trees we cut down and waste for in-print newspapers. Most of the information contained in the newspaper is already hosted on the newspapers’ website for free. Why not put more time and resources into enhancing our electronic media for newspapers?
Reference: http://www.lostremote.com/2006/12/15/web-now-exceeds-newspaper-use-in-us/
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Former Employees of Google Prepare Rival Search Engine -- Journal 11 - August 3, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/28/technology/28cool.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
Former employees of Google are prepared to take on this massive search engine. Anna Patterson, a former Google employee of two years, just launched a new search engine to compete with Google. Cuil, pronounced ‘cool’, as it is named, is the latest company launched to compete with Google’s search engine.
Of course these founders realize that, essentially, the public must decide which search engine will be number one. In June, Google accounted for 61.5% of search inquiries, while Yahoo had 20.9%, and Microsoft had 9.2%.
Google has been the leading search engine for the past few years. For example, in 2005, they were the leader in search inquiries with 84% of consumers making it their default search engine. But Yahoo, Microsoft, and Ask Jeeves were already climbing the list of search engines. Yahoo increased by 11%, MSN by 8%, and Ask Jeeves by 12%.
However, analysts believe Cuil has a chance, because of its founders. Armed with former Google insiders and top researchers, this company has many valuable resources backing it. These researchers claim that Cuil has 120 billion web pages in its index, making it the largest search engine than any other.
In my opinion, this is a brave attempt on Cuil’s part. Not only do they have to compete with Google, but, essentially, Cuil also has to gain market share from Yahoo and Microsoft. There are large companies out there competing with Google everyday, and Google still seems to rein the web.
Do I think it is impossible? No, but it will be a challenge. It is tough enough for new businesses to enter the market anyway, but to openly claim that you are directly competing with a large company like Google is brave.
More power to Cuil if they can achieve this goal. I think it is great for other companies to challenge Google. The competition may inspire creativity and new concepts for either organization.
Reference: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Search/Google-Reigns-as-Its-Competitors-Gain/
Former employees of Google are prepared to take on this massive search engine. Anna Patterson, a former Google employee of two years, just launched a new search engine to compete with Google. Cuil, pronounced ‘cool’, as it is named, is the latest company launched to compete with Google’s search engine.
Of course these founders realize that, essentially, the public must decide which search engine will be number one. In June, Google accounted for 61.5% of search inquiries, while Yahoo had 20.9%, and Microsoft had 9.2%.
Google has been the leading search engine for the past few years. For example, in 2005, they were the leader in search inquiries with 84% of consumers making it their default search engine. But Yahoo, Microsoft, and Ask Jeeves were already climbing the list of search engines. Yahoo increased by 11%, MSN by 8%, and Ask Jeeves by 12%.
However, analysts believe Cuil has a chance, because of its founders. Armed with former Google insiders and top researchers, this company has many valuable resources backing it. These researchers claim that Cuil has 120 billion web pages in its index, making it the largest search engine than any other.
In my opinion, this is a brave attempt on Cuil’s part. Not only do they have to compete with Google, but, essentially, Cuil also has to gain market share from Yahoo and Microsoft. There are large companies out there competing with Google everyday, and Google still seems to rein the web.
Do I think it is impossible? No, but it will be a challenge. It is tough enough for new businesses to enter the market anyway, but to openly claim that you are directly competing with a large company like Google is brave.
More power to Cuil if they can achieve this goal. I think it is great for other companies to challenge Google. The competition may inspire creativity and new concepts for either organization.
Reference: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Search/Google-Reigns-as-Its-Competitors-Gain/
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
High-Tech Monitors Help Safe Drivers Save on Insurance -- Journal 10 - August 3, 2008
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/07/29/driver.monitoring.ap/index.html
Progressive Insurance Corporation has recently launched a new program to give its drivers the chance to lower their insurance premiums. High-tech monitors placed on vehicles at the owner’s discretion are now making it possible to monitor what time people drive, how far they drive, how fast they accelerate, and how many times they hit the brakes. Based upon this information recorded by monitors, drivers can either have their insurance premiums reduced or pay a surcharge.
The voluntary program allows the insurance company to monitor instances previously mentioned to determine whether or not the driver is a ‘safe driver’. Insurance premiums will be reduced by 10% the first year just by signing up, and if they meet safe driver criteria, their rates could decrease by 60% based on their driving patterns. If they enroll and fail to meet safe driver standards, drivers could end up paying as much as a 9% surcharge.
Although the monitoring system does not collect where drivers actually go, some groups do express a concern for privacy invasions associated with the system. They claim that once the data is projected to the insurance companies, it becomes theirs.
I personally do not believe this is a bad idea completely. Since the system does not track people where they go, I do not view it as an invasion of privacy. Also, people voluntarily sign up to enroll in the program, so nobody is forcing them to participate.
I also find it hard to set standards for driving. There are many unusual circumstances that happen that may not be in the driver’s control. For example, if a deer runs in front of you, you have no choice but to either stand on the brakes or hit the deer. Both choices result in negatives on the monitoring system. I would hope the system allows for a set number of uncontrollable instances before it begins tacking on a surcharge.
Progressive Insurance Company certainly is not the only company that uses monitoring to help create safe drivers. For example, in 2007, American Family Insurance Company began a Teen Safe Driver program that allows an installed camera to take pictures of the road and the teen whenever it detects a swerve, crash, or slamming on the brakes. It then e-mails the pictures to mom and dad. The program does not necessarily offer discounts for the teen drivers, but it does help to create safer, more cautious drivers on the roads.
Reference:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20070914/ai_n20508925
Progressive Insurance Corporation has recently launched a new program to give its drivers the chance to lower their insurance premiums. High-tech monitors placed on vehicles at the owner’s discretion are now making it possible to monitor what time people drive, how far they drive, how fast they accelerate, and how many times they hit the brakes. Based upon this information recorded by monitors, drivers can either have their insurance premiums reduced or pay a surcharge.
The voluntary program allows the insurance company to monitor instances previously mentioned to determine whether or not the driver is a ‘safe driver’. Insurance premiums will be reduced by 10% the first year just by signing up, and if they meet safe driver criteria, their rates could decrease by 60% based on their driving patterns. If they enroll and fail to meet safe driver standards, drivers could end up paying as much as a 9% surcharge.
Although the monitoring system does not collect where drivers actually go, some groups do express a concern for privacy invasions associated with the system. They claim that once the data is projected to the insurance companies, it becomes theirs.
I personally do not believe this is a bad idea completely. Since the system does not track people where they go, I do not view it as an invasion of privacy. Also, people voluntarily sign up to enroll in the program, so nobody is forcing them to participate.
I also find it hard to set standards for driving. There are many unusual circumstances that happen that may not be in the driver’s control. For example, if a deer runs in front of you, you have no choice but to either stand on the brakes or hit the deer. Both choices result in negatives on the monitoring system. I would hope the system allows for a set number of uncontrollable instances before it begins tacking on a surcharge.
Progressive Insurance Company certainly is not the only company that uses monitoring to help create safe drivers. For example, in 2007, American Family Insurance Company began a Teen Safe Driver program that allows an installed camera to take pictures of the road and the teen whenever it detects a swerve, crash, or slamming on the brakes. It then e-mails the pictures to mom and dad. The program does not necessarily offer discounts for the teen drivers, but it does help to create safer, more cautious drivers on the roads.
Reference:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20070914/ai_n20508925
Friday, July 25, 2008
Google Launches New Space Race to the Moon -- Journal 9 - July 27, 2008
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/06/20/google.lunar.xprize/index.html
Google recently launched their own new space race to the moon. The multi-billion dollar company is offering $20 million to the first privately-funded team that can land on the moon. The rover must land on the moon’s surface, have it travel 500 meters or more, and send back data, photos, and video. This all has to be done by December 31, 2012. After this date has passed, the prize money drops to $15 million, and after 2014, there is no more prize offered.
Why is Google offering this incentive money to private teams? They believe that space travel should not be limited to only government-funded programs, but open to everyone. As of right now, there are about 13 teams officially participating in this new race to space, but the foundation expects that number to grow to 25.
Google also says it is not worried about anyone faking the mission. The teams must submit a mission plan as well as genuine photos and videos, a measure that the prize team says will be their assurance.
Just last month, in June, Google co-founder, Sergey Brin, made a $5 million down payment to book a seat on a future private orbital flight. This flight is set to take place in 2011 and will be the first private space flight ever. The initial payment only covers the option for a seat during the flight, but the entire flight could cost upwards of $35 million.
I find Google’s interest in space flights fascinating, and a bit scary. Yes, NASA has had problems in the past with space flights, but they pretty much have a competitive advantage over anyone else attempting to orbit in space. They have the funds and the technology to do so.
Google’s ‘sponsorship’, so to speak, of private space flights is an interesting concept. I guess it is just incentive or encouragement for others to begin paving the way for everyone to be able to do it one day. Although the $20 million will not cover the complete cost of a space flight, I assume teams find it appealing to at least get back some compensation.
Reference:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7449072.stm
Google recently launched their own new space race to the moon. The multi-billion dollar company is offering $20 million to the first privately-funded team that can land on the moon. The rover must land on the moon’s surface, have it travel 500 meters or more, and send back data, photos, and video. This all has to be done by December 31, 2012. After this date has passed, the prize money drops to $15 million, and after 2014, there is no more prize offered.
Why is Google offering this incentive money to private teams? They believe that space travel should not be limited to only government-funded programs, but open to everyone. As of right now, there are about 13 teams officially participating in this new race to space, but the foundation expects that number to grow to 25.
Google also says it is not worried about anyone faking the mission. The teams must submit a mission plan as well as genuine photos and videos, a measure that the prize team says will be their assurance.
Just last month, in June, Google co-founder, Sergey Brin, made a $5 million down payment to book a seat on a future private orbital flight. This flight is set to take place in 2011 and will be the first private space flight ever. The initial payment only covers the option for a seat during the flight, but the entire flight could cost upwards of $35 million.
I find Google’s interest in space flights fascinating, and a bit scary. Yes, NASA has had problems in the past with space flights, but they pretty much have a competitive advantage over anyone else attempting to orbit in space. They have the funds and the technology to do so.
Google’s ‘sponsorship’, so to speak, of private space flights is an interesting concept. I guess it is just incentive or encouragement for others to begin paving the way for everyone to be able to do it one day. Although the $20 million will not cover the complete cost of a space flight, I assume teams find it appealing to at least get back some compensation.
Reference:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7449072.stm
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)