Home
About
Help
Feedback
|
The Harrow Technology Report
Insight,
analysis, and commentary on the
Copyright © 2001-2005, Jeffrey R. Harrow. All rights
reserved.
Let's
NOT Be Left Behind! Listen
to this Issue.
Quote of the Week.
Thin Is In.
There's MUCH More I Can Do For You!
Let's See -- WHO
Made That Copy?
Personal Privacy -
Going the Way of the Buggy Whip?
The Elephant Gets
Better.
Insights...
How Old Is
Grandma?
Listen to this Issue.
Do you prefer to let your ears do the work of keeping you in-touch with, and thinking about where technology is taking us? If so, "The Harrow Technology Report" is also available in an audio-on-demand, M-P-3 version. If you have an M-P-3 player on your system (and most do, such as Window's Media Player, RealPlayer, etc.), the link below will either stream the file to you, or, depending on how your system is configured, it might download the file before playing it. Alternatively, if you specifically want to download the file, simply use the right-hand mouse button on the link, and choose "Save Target As..." Also, find out how you can listen at whatever speed is most comfortable for you through the FAQ at http://www.theharrowgroup.com/help.htm .
Here's where to listen to
this week's issue!
Quote of the Week.
With the many restrictions on stem cell research in the U.S. and in some other countries, it's worth noting what a team of the UK's best stem cell researchers (quite well supported in the UK) had to say when they recently visited several Asian countries: "[The] UK delegation ... found a staggering level of technology and commitment being put into stem cell research. The group of UK science types visited Beijing, Shanghai, Seoul, and Singapore in September, and what they saw left them picking their jaws up off the floor. "I came back blown away by the whole thing," one said. "It was mind-boggling to everybody."" [Comparing stem cell work in the UK and the U.S. to what they found in Asia]: "We're talking; they're doing."
"Stem Cells In Asia" In past issues we've explored some of the incredible potentials for health care, and more, of being a world leader in stem cell and related NBIC fields (the coming together of the previously disparate fields of Nanotechnology, Biology and medicine, Information sciences, and Cognitive sciences). Yet as we can see from those quotes and the article behind them, it appears that other countries may already be leading in some of these fields. Considering the impacts to the human race and to national economies that these new biological and medical technologies will likely make, choosing to play second (or third or fourth) fiddle will leave any country at an incredible competitive disadvantage. And that could well change the balance of global trade and indeed, the world order. Not fighting to be first in what will be a burgeoning field that could make the past decades' exponential growth of computers seem like a small thing, would be an incredible mistake. Don't Blink and be left behind!
Thin Is In.
Photonanographs are generally quite pleasing to the eye, and the one above from the Nov. 18, 2004 CIO Today (http://cio-today.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=28525) is no exception. But for most of us, our appreciation for what we're looking at stops with the aesthetics (like many paintings, but that's another topic.) In this case, we're looking at what may be the first "two-dimensional fabric" (not 3-D, as even the thinnest of today's fabrics are); it's composed of a layer of grapheme that is one single atom thick. While at first glance this may seem "interesting" with no practical use, it holds the potential to lead to incredibly tiny transistors compared to what we can manufacture today -- or even tomorrow -- given the expected limits of today's lithographic semiconductor manufacturing techniques. According to Jo Grady at the UK's University of Manchester's, this is: "...the thinnest possible fabric. The resulting atomic sheet is stable, highly flexible, strong and remarkably conductive." He further speculates that this material: "...may lead to computers made from a single molecule." In general, a transistor's switching time decreases and hence its speed increases, as its size decreases. And this is one mighty size decrease. Pretty impressive. And if these extrapolations come to pass, just think of how they would not only extend Moore's Law far into the future, but they might well dramatically shrink the "number-of-transistors-on-a-chip doubling time" that accelerates technological developments far faster than what Moore's Law has yielded during the past forty years! Don't hold your breath for the introduction of this technology specifically, because there are many contending processes for our future computing devices. But this demonstrates the type of basic research that can, and will, "change all the rules." Again and again. Again, Don't Blink!
BEGIN Self-Serving Advertisement There's MUCH More I Can Do For You!
You may not realize it, but there's much more to The Harrow Group than just "The Harrow Technology Report." For almost twenty years, as I've been sharing my research on the ever-faster-moving and converging technologies that are changing how we work, live, and play, I've also been working directly with businesses and organizations, large and small, to help them understand and address how these changes may affect them, their customers, and their customers' businesses, through a series of:
·
Presentations -
Highly engaging, interactive, multimedia,
constantly-updated presentations and keynote
speeches to individual businesses, internal groups,
and trade organizations, helping participants to
viscerally understand and appreciate how technology
has brought us to where we are today, and where it's
likely to lead us tomorrow.
·
Workshops
- Beginning with the presentation described above
(to give all participants a common understanding and
insight), the workshop further engages attendees to
explore how this march of technology might affect
their individual businesses and organizations, and
their specific needs.
·
One-On-One Consulting
-
Individualized consulting services, available via
phone or in-person, to help you explore the topics
and trends discussed in The Harrow Technology
Report, and related issues. Please continue at http://www.theharrowgroup.com/consulting2.htm for additional information. Then, contact me at Jeff@TheHarrowGroup.com with any additional questions, to discuss fees, and to schedule a consulting event. I look forward to working with you! End Self-Serving Advertisement Let's See -- WHO Made That Copy?
The concept of "digital watermarks" has been around for quite some time, and can identify the source of pictures and other files (such as songs) available over the Internet (or from other places). What makes digital watermarking technique particularly interesting is that, in general, people have no idea that the content they use can identify where it came from and perhaps indicate copyright violations. It works like this: using proprietary techniques that differ for each type of media, the owner or distributor of the media uses special software to encode their identifying information directly into the image, song, or other media -- not as a "tag" or other adjunct to the media file, but actually INTO the image, song, etc, without (they say) degrading the picture or song's quality. In a picture, for example, the information might be encoded into seemingly random and very subtle variations of the image that are invisible, unless you use the vendor's special software that reads these invisible codes. That means that if you were to use a digitally watermarked picture on your Web site, or say in a book you publish, the copyright owner could run the software against the picture (even if scanned from a book, since the information is encoded within the visible image) and prove that it's "their" image, and that you didn't pay any copyright fee associated with its use. The same concept applies to other digitally watermarked media as well. This might sound intrusive, but copyright owners do have the right to be compensated for their work, and this would seem to be a rather benign way of identification and enforcement. But such watermarking now goes a step further, into the mundane but pervasive world of color copy machines and printers! One new technique can now identify the source of color copies that you make on your office or other color copier or print on your color laser printer! As described by the Nov. 22,
2004 PCWorld.com (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ "Next time you make a printout from your color laser printer, shine an LED flashlight beam on it and examine it closely with a magnifying glass. You might be able to see the small, scattered yellow dots printed there that could be used to trace the document back to you. According to experts, several printer companies quietly encode the serial number and the manufacturing code of their color laser printers and color copiers on every document those machines produce. Governments, including the United States, already use the hidden markings to track counterfeiters. 'It's a trail back to you, like a license plate.' The dots' minuscule size, covering less than one-thousandth of the page, along with their color combination of yellow on white, makes them invisible to the naked eye... (One way to determine if your color laser is applying this tracking process is to shine a blue LED light--say, from a keychain laser flashlight--on your page and use a magnifier.)" Given the easy availability and quality of today's color copiers and printers, which can potentially be used to counterfeit everything from currency to stock certificates, techniques such as this one (plus that many color copiers recognize currency and won't copy the bills) may be helpful to society. But its also important to realize that if you make color copies of anything -- either legitimate documents or company (or government) confidential information that you intend to sell to the highest bidder, or just read at home that night -- the physical copies can now point back to their source. Between cell phones, toll booth transponders, surveillance cameras, RFID tags, and more, our movements and actions are increasingly an open book (which we as individuals can not copyright.) There are benefits to this, some quite significant, but there is (as always) the very real potential for abuse. It's up to each of us, through our elected representatives, to assure that we allow such technologies to be used in ways that help society without compromising the freedoms that citizens of many societies expect. Let's be sure that we implement every new technology in ways that we are, quite literally, willing to live with.
Personal Privacy - Going the Way of the Buggy Whip?This is an article I've recently written for Future Brief (http://www.futurebrief.com/). Future Brief is published by New Global Initiatives (http://www.ngiweb.com/) and offers brief summaries, commentaries, and other resources to help people, especially those on The Hill who form national policy, to keep up on technological innovations. But Future Brief adds an important twist -- it "takes one step back and looks at the greater convergence of the accelerating changes in science and technology, with the equally rapidly accelerating changes in society and politics." (http://www.futurebrief.com/about.asp) . We've touched before on the continuing erosions of personal privacy (http://www.futurebrief.com/jeffharrowprivacy.asp). They're not only the result of governmental database intrusion (although that certainly bears watching), but they're also occurring due to technological innovations that -could- lead to a time when everybody is watching, and recording, everyone else. Now it's time for an update. Surveillance technologies already seem to be an accepted norm, although currently they're principally used by businesses and by governments who place cameras and sensors in stores and on public ways. Whether we're driving along an expressway or motorway, passing through a toll booth, driving or walking downtown, being stopped by a police car, or shopping in a retail store, we're very likely "on-camera," and on-tape. But this is generally a one-way street (the occasional Rodney King incidents excepted) -- the commercial and governmental monitors have the advantage on us. For example, if someone shoplifts, they (appropriately) run a high risk of being caught, with the tape going to the prosecutor. And I expect that a "jury of our peers" would be hard-pressed to ignore a TV show of the theft, starring the perpetrator.
Turning The Tables. But suppose someone steals something from US; which might likely happen beyond the gaze of today's surveillance cameras -- it's often "our word against theirs." Or consider if a Rodney King type incident were to happen to us "behind" a squad car's camera. Or, in one personal case on the Champs-Élysées, consider that my wife wasn't even aware that she had been professionally pickpocketed until well after the fact. We don't have the advantage of a record of what actually happened (or, generally, even have access to the images from a nearby surveillance camera that might have recorded the event). That's the state of things -- but only "so far." Because as technology continues to evolve, tech companies, including the 500 pound gorilla, are starting the process that may turn each of us (who are willing) into elements of a wide-reaching surveillance mesh.
Enter The Hardware. One early hardware prototype that might enable us to keep a personal record of our day comes from a research project within Microsoft, called the "SenseCam." As described and shown in the June 15, 2004 BBCnews (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3797581.stm), this is a specialized camera (which would get far smaller before it might be commercialized) that uses a 132-degree fish eye lens to capture a large swath of the world in front of us.
Currently, the prototype stores 2,000 images which are triggered by its built-in accelerometers, passive infrared detectors, and sensors for environmental conditions such as light level and temperature (and later, I'm sure, GPS information and the "direction of gaze" from an electronic compass.) And reminiscent of the "enhanced" Six-Million Dollar Man, this camera can record into the infrared range, providing more information on playback then our on-site eyes could glean. Periodically, the camera's contents would be transferred to an "off-person" database (perhaps wirelessly throughout the day) where, through a special application, the data and pictures could be searched and presented in any number of ways, such as in a timeline or as a "fly-through."
The Power Of The Network. Of course my SenseCam might not have recorded my wife's pocket being picked; I might have been looking the wrong way to "see" the pickpocket. But imagine if a non-trivial number of people began wearing such devices. Then, assume that these folks were willing to automatically add the time, date, location, and "direction of gaze" of each of their images (but not the images themselves) to a public database. Even if my SenseCam did not capture the crime on the Champs-Élysées, I might have been able to check the database for others who have recorded the scene, and then sent each of them a digital call for help. A 'coalition of the willing' might then choose to send me their specific pictures of the pick pocketing event, which might help the police identify the "perps." And that's just one example. The primary intent of this prototype is not for surveillance. In the words of researcher Lyndsay Williams, it's "like a black box for the human body," referring to the "black boxes" (which are actually orange) in commercial aircraft that record the "life" of a flight, including aircraft performance data and cockpit conversations, that can be used to reconstruct events leading up to a crash. For humans though, these personal "black boxes" would record "our lives," which could be helpful to a diverse set of people in many ways. Consider the cases of an aging population's general memory malaise, or people with specific memory or cognitive diseases; these records might help them maintain a "visual diary" that they could peruse to refresh their memories. (And a killer mainstream software application that has access to this data might be to help us all to better remember names and faces!) Similarly, if audio were also recorded and the software was smart enough to categorize and summarize the images, sounds, and environmental data, the practice of taking notes at meetings might become an ancient custom. Also, "tourism" could be enhanced with a detailed "home movie" record of vacations, etc. I can imagine that professional tour guides or travel agencies might make their records of trips available to prospective clients to entice them to take the trip. And more...
Always With Two Faces. As with most of what technology brings us, there is also a dark side. With the likelihood that other than in our homes (and NannyCams could even remove this exception), someone, somewhere might well have a record of our locations and actions and associates. (I can imagine any number of scenarios where this could be, shall we say, uncomfortable.) Not only that, but if people choose to store their records online, then a hacker or Agency might be able to stitch together a comprehensive view of our days. There's also the issue that historically, the courts have defined numerous guidelines as to where people have (and don't have) a reasonable expectation of privacy. Yet if the population takes to SenseCam-like devices in a big way, the current legal presumptions of privacy might have little meaning.
Think... Surveillance of this depth is not going to happen in the near future. On the other hand, cell phone cameras which can record still and moving images, and sound, are making significant inroads into pockets. Which is a telling first step. Technology is going to continue to march forward, and it will yield and refine many new devices that will intentionally, or as a byproduct of their intended uses, further erode our privacy. Which places us at a juncture where we, as a society, should be deciding just how much we value our privacy. If the concept of personal privacy is no longer significant in the context of our changing world, then these technological developments may be cherished. On the other hand, if we continue to treasure our privacy, we may wish to strengthen controls on who can record what, where, and when. This issue is far from black and white; there are legitimate desires and concerns on both sides of the privacy fence. But in societies where individuals' rights and freedoms are held in high esteem, it's a debate that's worth having. And we have to have the debate early, or else the inevitable creep of technology will invisibly make the choices for us. We will, after all, have to live in the world that we create (or allow to be created for us). Let's be sure that it's the world that we collectively want.
The Elephant Gets Better.
The proverbial elephant's memory doesn't rely on "chips," but our digital memories do. As we continue to extend our reach towards the unlimited capacity and retention time of the "elephant," it's time for us to add a new acronym to our memory (sic). It's FRAM, or "Ferroelectric Random Access Memory. Brought to our attention by reader Rocky Rawstern, the Nov. 17, 2004 ElectronicNews points out that Fujitsu has now commercialized a low power 1 megabit FRAM chip. These chips are non-volatile for up to ten years, yet compared to contemporary Flash memory, FRAM can be read and written tens of thousands of time faster (in the hundred-nanosecond range) while using one-tenth of the electricity. Also, these FRAM chips are robust. Unlike Flash RAM which has an upper limit in the tens to hundreds of thousands of times that its cells can be written to before they wear out, FRAM ups that ante to more than ten-billion times! (http://www.reed-electronics.com/electronicnews/article/CA480995.html and http://www.fujitsu.com/us/news/pr/fma_20041117.html) Samples are now available for $19 per chip, as a prelude to full market availability. By the way, these FRAM chips are already "nanotechnology" devices, since they're produced using a 35 nm process compared to contemporary chips' 90 nm process. There are, of course, a growing number of contenders for our future memory devices, such as holographic, MRAM (Magnetic RAM), Ovonic Unified memory, nanotube memory, polymer memory, and even nano-sized mechanical switch memories. But it may be FRAM that gets to the market first which could give it a leg-up -- at least initially. This sounds neat, but what real value might we see as FRAM and similar fast, low-power, robust, non-volatile memory becomes mainstream? Clearly there are lots of potential uses in portable electronic devices, but eventually such fast, robust, non-volatile memory might make the 'ol "reboot" a thing of the past. If a computing device could be shut down for up to ten years without "losing its memory's mind," then why reload it from a large, slow hard disk each time and go through the long configuration process? Just one more example of the changes that each new innovation can yield. So (er) remember -- Once again, Don't Blink!
Insights...After perusing the Aug. 30, 2004 issue of The Harrow Technology Report (www.theharrowgroup.com/articles/20040830/20040830.htm), reader David Govett offered several comments and insights that got me to thinking, and I'm pleased to share them, and my responses to him, below. In most cases he excerpts a line from one of several articles in that Aug. 30 issue, and then offers his comments. My responses then follow:
1. Quote: "[Given near-term storage advances,] you can store [on your hard disk] every conversation you have ever had, from the time you are born to the time you die... " David: Could it be subpoenaed to "testify" against you? Jeff: Good point. Actually, without explicit legislation to the contrary, I'd be amazed if it could NOT be subpoenaed, considering the surprising amount of "black box" data that is already collected (and stored) by chips in modern cars which can and are used against drivers involved in accidents.
2. Quote: "A person could have a snap picture with a 180-degree fish-eye view of one's surroundings for every minute of every day for the rest of one's life." David: Why not 360 degrees? If the data were automatically transmitted to "off-person" storage, it would make a good start at a personal security system. Jeff: No argument, but it might look odd to have a vertical fisheye lens stuck to the top of our heads! (Of course that wouldn't be necessary because, if the lenses were as miniaturized as they'd have to be for this application, they could be implanted in a belt, shirt, etc. pointing in any desired direction.)
3. Quote: [With a full record of everything seen and heard], "I'll finally be able to win some of those arguments with my wife!" David: Not suggested. How little you understand women. Jeff: True!! :-)
4. Quote: "I know a neuroscientist who downloaded the Human Genome Project onto an Apple iPod." David: Genome hacking -- and you thought computer hacking was bad! The horrors of a nano-bestiary will be loosed upon the world. Jeff: I believe you're right, in that once the techniques become well known, it would seem likely to be a (dare I say it) fertile playground for the black hacker. And of course 'perfect security' is an oxymoron...
5. Quote: "Nanotechnology
is a technological race that, when won, promises to
have far more of an impact on how we work, live, and
play (especially in the medical/surgical fields -
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/ David: Think of it: immortally retired; married for millennia; thousands of wives (serial polygamy); tens of thousands of children...; hearing Pet Clark sing Downtown 74 million times... [Perhaps] humans will long for death (probably via some kind of 'nanoterminator')? Jeff: Good insights, David, and potentially valid. On the other hand, if you've read the various Lazarus Long books from Robert Heinlein, he takes a different view -- in that the virtually-immortal hero's zest for life remains (more or less) intact and he periodically ditches his status quo to start a new "life" by emigrating to new planets, etc. Sounds like work to me, but...
6. David: I'd start a Luddism blog, but I'm too fascinated by the nanobullets heading toward our collective heads. Jeff: Indeed, there may be a technological singularity where people don't WANT to embrace more of it. But perhaps not -- look at Email, which has been almost universally embraced by contemporary folks in developed countries -- even though it takes significant hours each week to deal with it! Judging by history, if new products/services prove to confer competitive advantages, they will be adopted (telegraph, telephone, radio, TV, Internet, VOIP, fax machines, the Web, etc.) Thanks for your insightful commentary -- most thought-provoking!
How Old Is Grandma?
Finally, from an unknown source
out in the Internet...
Now -- how old do you
think I am ??? (Scroll down to see.)
v v v v v v v v v v v v v v
v
Grandma
is Only 58
It's pretty scary if you think about it, considering how vastly more things will change over the next fifty-eight (or even ten or fifteen) years...
About 'The Harrow Technology Report.'
"The Harrow Technology Report" explores the innovations and trends of many contemporary and emerging technologies, and then draws some less than obvious connections between them, to help us each survive and prosper in the Knowledge Age. "The Harrow Technology Report" is brought to you by Jeffrey R. Harrow, Principal of The Harrow Group. http://www.TheHarrowGroup.com . Where To Find "The Harrow Technology Report:"
Copyright (c) 2001-2005, Jeffrey R. Harrow. All
rights reserved.
|
.gif)
.gif)
