Goodbye Meerkat

The apparent "death" of Meerkat is telling of the limits of the media to influence users, a limit that I generally did not think existed anymore. For me, conventional wisdom always pointed to the fact that the media influences users' decisions - their wants and their needs. However, the evolution of Meerkat, or lack thereof, portray a different picture entirely.

For some background, Meerkat is a live video streaming app. Essentially, you can use your iPhone to stream video of whatever you're currently looking at to broadcast to the user base. Meerkat garnered impressive media coverage on the new app; enough to make your average consumer believe that the hot new app was as excellent as the media portrayed it.  While Meerkat was making its rounds, Twitter announced that it acquired Periscope, another live streaming app which went live on March 26th. On the same day Meerkat made news by receiving $14 million in new funding. Somehow all the media hype around Meerkat didn't matter. By Sunday, Periscope had cracked the top 30 on iTunes while Meerkat fell to No. 523. And thus is the nature of competition.

When considering Meerkat's huge decline, hard facts about Meerkat's popularity even before Periscope come to light - the facts being that Meerkat was never more than a glorified media sensation. The highest Meerkat ever ranked was No. 140 on March 20th. And yet Meerkat still raked in $14 million last week all due to the media push behind the app calling it "the breakout of the century." Essentially, the media frenzy was able to make a difference for investors; however, it meant nothing well it came to actual consumers. Why and how did Meerkat gain so much of a media frenzy anyway when it was never that popular? My best guess is that it goes to show the power of tech bloggers in the internet age. Enough of them commented on the app, which was somehow enough to bandwagon extensive media coverage. Alas, it was for nothing which brings me to wonder on how these bloggers and reporters can be so wrong with their forecasts. I guess thus is the nature of game where predicting consumer behavior in the appverse might be more complicated than originally anticipated. It's comical and a little sad to see how far Meerkat has dropped despite all of the hype. Overall, the evolution of Meerkat is an extremely interesting look at the limits to media which questions how accurate tech media is anticipated to be.

Also, how cool and freaky is the entire premise of Meerkat and Periscope. I thought aggregated Snapchat stories from various users was an innovative feature that let you experience what others were doing. Live stream pushes that envelope even further. It seems to follow the trend of consumers wanting to do everything/have everything/experience everything all at once. Want to be awake only by 9 am in NJ and still catch the sunrise. Not a problem, I'm sure someone's livestreaming the sunrise from California.

http://bgr.com/2015/03/30/meerkat-vs-periscope-analysis-journalism/

3D Printing has stepped up its game

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/03/16/this-new-technology-blows-3d-printing-out-of-the-water-literally/

Click that link and watch that video. If it reminded you of The Terminator, you're very observant (or know how to read an article). This is a new method of 3D printing that works completely differently than the currently accepted method of printing several small layers of a solidifying plastic on top of each other to form a 3D Object. This, instead, uses a liquid that solidifies as lasers hit it, and the lasers get constantly redirected and hit the liquid at different angles as the model gets pulled from the liquid.

Let me reiterate: this new method of three dimensional printing involves shooting lasers at things. Let no one tell you otherwise: the future is now, and it's at least slightly cool.

This new method is much faster than the current method too. That Eiffel tower at that level of detail at that size would take at least an hour with current 3d printers. This took under ten minutes, I believe. It's exciting to see the 3D printing industry continue to innovate and improve. Hopefully soon I'll finally be able to download a car, just like that series of ads never wanted me to.

Shedding Light on the Darknet

This post started out as a response to Ethan's blog post, but it quickly became far too long for a comment. And it's my week to write my own post anyway, so here we are.



Maybe I could shed some light onto the darknet and deep web.

As for the difference between the two, you got it. There is the surface web, the deep web, and the darknet. Surface web is this. Deep web is not indexed by search engines, but is not necessarily inaccessible. This could perhaps be information buried deep in an unpopular website that Google never managed to get its hands on. Then there is the darknet which *is* totally inaccessible unless you are using Tor. Every website with the .onion domain (The Onion Router) exists only through Tor.

Once you get connected to the Tor network, a browser window pops up confirming that you are connected. You can open up any standard webpage, except you will likely get the international version of the page due to your exit node being overseas. You can do google searches and check Facebook (although this is obviously a bad move...you don't want to send any sensitive info over this network).

Then, if you know the web address of the .onion site you're trying to access, you can type it in and take a visit. Anything you can imagine, you can find on the darknet. There are lots of sites I've opened in my exploration and very quickly closed down. All transactions are done using bitcoins, all sensitive communication is done via PGP encryption. You can (allegedly) purchase assassins and hitmen (although my hunch is that most of these are scams), you can buy unregistered weapons, and you can also buy information.

I know people who have purchased lifetime Netflix accounts, hulu accounts, Spotify premium, premium porn memberships, you name it. $5 or $10 and you get a few usernames that will last (again, allegedly) forever. The vendors even offer customer service in that if your account stops working they will send you a new username for a certain period after your purchase.

Then, you can also buy guides on how to get free Apple devices by exploiting their return policy. You can get info on how to phish credit cards at your local bank. There are tons of conspiracy theorists offering their proof of government meddling. You can buy cell phone jammers, buy guides on how to make narcotics, grow weed, on and on.

I have seen the accounts work and I have read some of the information offered. It seems like it could work, it's pretty crafty, although I have certainly never taken the risk and tried.

Then there's the darknet markets. The Silkroad is the most popular, but is actually disgraced in the darknet community. It's gotten taken down a few times by law enforcement and come back up, so people question the security of their information. There are many more markets with varying levels of exclusivity and varying products offered. Here's where you find all your drugs, drug paraphernalia, counterfeit passports, fake IDs, and basically anything else you may want but not be able to find on Amazon (although you can get them shipped to your door at speeds no slower than Amazon's)

I cannot personally confirm how detailed the IDs are or how potent the drugs are. I'm a curious boy, but I have limits. What I will argue, however, is that I don't agree entirely with the tone you (referring to Ethan's original blog post, found here) took towards people who use the darknet. You made it seem that only negative comes from the darknet.

While this may not have been when you meant entirely, and it is certainly true in some instances, it is not true in all of them.

To preface here, I am not addressing the human trafficking or child porn or theft guides or things of that nature. The darknet is undeniably a hub for criminal behavior and once I saw some of the darkest parts of the darknet, my curiosity dulled. I have no interest in seeing such things, nor do I support anyone who has an interest, nor do I support the continued existence of those horrible things.

On the other hand, I think that many times, people who use the darknet for their illegal ventures are actually doing it because it's a safer route than the alternatives. Heres a hypothetical (really). If I were to go to a concert and I wanted to get some drugs, I have a few options. I could wait until the show and ask around and see what I get. The risk here is that I have no way of knowing what it is I just bought. It could be a $20 sugar pill, or it could be a $20 cheap research chemical that could put me into cardiac arrest. I could do that, or I could look up some reviews online to see the most reputable vendor, compare prices, make a purchase, buy a drug testing kit from walmart and run some tests of my own to ensure what I purchased is what I want it to be, then go from there.

I would argue that by using the darknet, I just caused *less* harm to myself than I would have otherwise. The darknet is not responsible for anyone's drug addiction, because the bottom line is that these "addicts" downloaded tor, taught themselves PGP encryption, and did the vendor research on their own time. These markets only exist because people wanted a safer way to get what they want. There's no billboards for the Silkroad, there are no late night infomercials. It's actually MORE challenging to buy drugs online (especially for a junkie addict who likely isn't familiar with computer land) than it is to get them on the street, so the argument can't even be made that it's facilitating easy access.

Anyone going through the trouble of buying drugs online would have gone through the trouble to get them in any other manner. I view it as a positive that these "addicts" can get higher quality drugs, since at least that way there is less risk of harm from getting something bunk. Many overdoses come from people getting drugs that aren't what was advertised. Shady drug dealers will tell you you're buying a $10 tab of LSD (actually a very safe drug, believe it or not) but it's really some cheap questionable research chemical that has unknown side effects and a low LD50.


Then, on a different note, there are people who are actually prescribed medications that choose to buy on the darknet over going to Target Pharmacy. Oftentimes, the prices for these generic drugs online are significantly cheaper than what they would cost for someone without insurance, for example. Again, obviously there are many people without prescriptions just trying to use these drugs recreationally, and I can't argue that there is any positive outcome from prescription drug abuse. The subset of people who are using these drugs for medical reasons cannot be ignored, however.


The reason I know so much about the darknet is due largely to my curiosity, and partially due to first hand accounts from people who I know. I'm a CS major so I couldn't help myself from exploring. Keep in mind that aside from the Netflix account which I did see used successfully, I can't say with 100% confidence that anything on the darknet is legit.

Please don't get any ideas about me! I'm a good student!

Big Brother Car

Ford is releasing a new car that actually throttles its max speed based on the speed limit. The way it accomplishes this is by actually scanning road signs and recognizing what they mean. Furthermore the car doesn't even move the physical brake but rather programmatically limits the engine’s outputted torque by adjusting the amount of fuel it receives. For the safety of the driver, in circumstances that may require temporary speeding such as dangers encountered by other drives, this restriction can be temporarily overridden by pressing firmly on the accelerator. The idea is that if speedy drivers can’t speed then the roads will be safer. The technology behind the cars ability while fascinating, in that the car is able to actually take a simple video input and derive meaningful data from it, its implementation sounds like a terrible idea. While I do completely acknowledge that speeding can be dangerous I don’t agree that you shouldn't be given the option. There are times when speeding is incredibly useful such as when traveling to and from work every day. The 65 mile per hour limit of the highways is usually broken by most drivers and statistically speaking most people are able to travel daily without getting into an accident. It’s my opinion that an issue only arises when a person goes significantly faster than those around them, i.e. 30+ mph faster, or drive aggressively. I do agree that it’s important to stay close to the speed limit but going 75 is pretty typical provided the people around you are going about the same speed. More importantly than the actual physical limitation is the increasingly large opinion that technology should be doing everything for us. It seems the technological industry has begun to rapidly adopt the idea that people prefer computers to think for them. There is very little trust in the population to monitor themselves furthermore it is diverting responsibility. People should be trusted to take care of themselves as well as be able to be held accountable for their mistakes. Moreover, if people aren't given the opportunity to decide they can’t learn the weight of their decisions. For example, say a teacher decides to require all students to put their cellphone into a bin at the beginning of class; thus guaranteeing that none of the students are texting during class. First let’s assume that without their phone they will actually pay attention. Those who are easily distracted would never encounter experience the situation where they fail a test because they had been texting the entire time. At a first glance this seems like a good thing but this also means they won’t have ever learned the importance of paying attention in the first place; which in turn increases the chances that when given the opportunity to slack off they will. Second in reality collecting the phones would by no means guarantees that students would actually pay attention; if they don’t want to pay attention they won’t. In the same way just because you take speeding away doesn't mean that people will become any safer drivers. Instead they’ll just be more annoyed at their inability to speed and probably become more aggressive drivers. This can be extrapolated to essentially any situation in which you allow someone or something else to think for you. If not expected to think for themselves people won’t and they become far too complacent and even more reckless. I understand the desire to improve overall safety but restrictions are not the way to accomplish it. The right way is to actually inform people of the danger of their actions or inactions; then to let them decide for themselves.

Amazon is Now Selling Goats

Article

The internet sales giant Amazon is deciding to further broaden its horizons. Recently Amazon has further developed its on-demand video service as well as continuing to offer its online ebooks. However, the newest idea Amazon has entertained is service based sales. What this means is that Amazon will allow people to sell services like oil changes, garbage disposal, and bizarre services such as renting your own goat herd. Though Amazon will not offer most of the services itself, they will allow people to sell their services through the website. Amazon's major claim is that by them doing this, consumers can view accurate reviews of different service providers. Most of the time, in order to view accurate reviews of a service provider, one would have to do research online at forums or look for yelp reviews. However, for smaller businesses, any reviews would be hard to find. Amazon's service allows anyone to easily see how cheaply and reliably a service can be purchased for.

               One of Amazon's biggest hopes with selling services is that it will stop "surprise charges" that come with a lot of services. Amazon says that they want to standardize the haggling and up-selling of some services. For example, even though it isn't fair by any means, an auto repair shop could say that the an oil change became more complicated and make up an excuse such as the filter was rotted and fell apart trying to get it off, adding to the amount of time it took. However, there's no way that the consumer can technically check this and someone who isn't sure what goes in to an oil change or standard service would even second guess what the repair center is telling them. Though this is malpractice, it's not hard to see how something like this could happen with a smaller shop or service center. This is what Amazon is claiming to try and weed out using their new system.

               Critics also brought up the point that Amazon's current dropdown selection method wouldn't work for more custom services. One such critic brought up the building of a patio or porch. There would be different heights, types of wood, styles, backyard sizes, etc. How could Amazon accommodate for all of those? Amazon still has not commented on this and it can be assumed there wouldn't be a standard price for services such as this. This would have to be more of a way for people to find the services and then just speak to those selling the service to establish a price. Another question that has been asked of Amazon is how much of a cut does Amazon take? Though they have not made an official statement, the beta testing of Amazon's new service shows anywhere from 10% for recurring and 20% for one-time non-custom services. This begs the question of whether this is really worth it for sellers? If 20% of your sale is taken by Amazon, and as a small business your pricing needs to be competitive compared to larger service-providers, how much are you actually taking home? The major selling point will be the ability to acquire seller reviews for your services, and that's what Amazon is counting on. 

The deep web

The deep web is always a phrase I have heard in passing. I know about websites like the silk road but have never really thought about the implications of what can happen on the deep web. The deep web is defined by Wikipedia as the “portion of the World Wide Web content that is not indexed by standard search engines”.  The portion of the web that can be accessed normally is known as the surface web. To use the deep web one has to use browsers that make the user anonymous and make it so that content being accessed cannot be tracked. This makes the deep web perfect for illegal ventures. This is why the deep web is also known as the dark web.  The things I have heard people finding on the deep web are rather shocking and hard to believe. Of course you find people selling drugs and guns, but I have even heard friends say there are places to hire hit men. The most disturbing thing I have heard is something referred to as the Human experiment which is apparently a website for medical researches to communicate illegal research they do on the homeless.  Manny of this thing sound like the kind of jokes people I have seen online would make. Even acknowledging this there is something scary about the deep web. Clearly horrible things go on the world people sell unregister guns to criminals, sell hard drugs to addicts, and even participate in human trafficking. It is scary to think that the deep web facilitates all of these things that hurt people.  

I would guess that this content would represent a small portion of the entire internet. Interestingly, I have seen sources that claim that the deep web is vastly bigger than the regular web in size. I have seen claims that it is 500 times the size of the regular internet. My gut reaction to these claims is that they must be wrong.  I would guess that people might be citing older research but the very nature of the deep web makes it hard to say for sure how much data it holds. I think this is what is unsettling about the deep web to me, it is so mysterious. A great analogy I’ve seen for it is that the collection of everything on the internet is the ocean.  Our search engines our fish like nets being dragged along the water. Our nets are very limited and only drag just below the water. The dark web is the huge dark amount of water way below the surface that is hard to comprehend at seems foreign.

Part of the reason for writing this blog is to see if other people in the class know more about the deep web. It is something I am really fascinated by and want to try to good picture of what it is. While that might not be possible I still want to know more. Let me know if you have had or know anyone who has any experiences with the deep wen.

Computers, Electronics, and Music

The world of computers and electronics has greatly influenced the world of music. Since the early 20^th century, musical artists have been toying with electronics to make new kinds of music. One of the first and most popular kinds of electronic instruments is the theremin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theremin). Later on, towards the 60s and 70s, modular synthesizers became more accessible and popular. They work by filtering a signal through different modules, manipulating the sound. In the 80s, digital synthesizers were created and use digital signal processing techniques to make musical sounds. In addition to synthesizers, sequencers and drum machines also gained popular use to repeat rhythmic patterns that could be played over or programmed to fit with other music.

All of these cool technologies certainly shaped the music that we listen to today, but I want to discuss Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI). It is a standardized interface that communicates control instructions to instruments and computers. Basically, all computers have MIDI libraries that can play a wide variety of musical instruments. A lot of the instruments don’t sound the same, but the general tone is conveyed through the electronic interface. It uses many of the same sounds you might find in an early video game. MIDI is used by artists to either add samples to music, to enhance their sound, or have music programmed so that it can be practiced along to. Many times, I have programmed a song into MIDI and played it back so I could hear several instruments together. There are tons of music writing programs that use MIDI for playback purposes, such as Finale, Sibelius, and Guitar Pro.

Even though MIDI is an important development for me personally, most people think of EDM when they hear of electronic music. Dance music and its various genres have become extremely popular in the modern day. Tons of people attend clubs, festivals, and raves for house, techno, trance, dupstep, and trap music. Another fun genre of music using electronic instruments is chiptune. Artists use the sound chips in vintage computers, video game consoles, and arcade machines to make music. It originally was used to make music for video games, but newer artists who wanted to capture that sound for original music turned to these methods. Of course, there will always be the experimental artists that use electronic signals and crazy algorithms to write music, but that sort of ideas are mostly applied to noise music, which isn't nearly as popular.

All of the genres, techniques, and technology that have evolved from the coalition between music and electronics have had a big impact on our society. Even electric guitars and microphones owe it to circuits and wires for existing. The use of computers to understand and create music will continue to grow and evolve as humanity continues to grow and evolve.

GitHub Hit by DDoS Attack

Beginning last Thursday, GitHub began being attack by what they called "the largest DDoS (distributed denial of service) attack in github.com's history." Although at this point GitHub has regained service to 100%, the attacker still continues, attempting to change his methods. The attack was traced back to China, and already there is much speculation on whether this is amateur or professional. There has been some hint in a few blow posts, specifically this one, that this incident could be related to a censorship issue: "Based on reports we've received, we believe the intent of this attack is to convince us to remove a specific class of content."

Security experts said that the attackers directed a massive amount of traffic to two pages on GitHub by redirecting all users from the Chinese search engine, Baidu. According to The Wall Street Journal, Baidu claims it was never hacked and that it's systems were not compromised. But somehow all traffic to Baidu.com was being directed to two pages on GitHub with banned content in China. Although it is hard to believe that amateurs would have the capability to perform an attack like this, it does not really make sense that the government would direct traffic to banned content.

In every big hacking case like this, it is always suspected to be some big government figure. When Sony got hacked a few months ago, it was immediately suspected that the North Korean government was behind it, because of their upcoming movie The Interview. but the most likely scenario in most cases is that it's just someone really resourceful and dedicated with a computer. Obviously North Korea denied any involvement in that hack as will China in this one. But they do bring up a good point that this could be connected to the government, considering all of their censorship laws.

It was reported that this year in particular they have been stepping up their censorship efforts. They banned three of the largest Virtual Private Network(VPN) sites users would use to avoid the firewall and get to restricted sites: Astrill, GoldenFrog and StrongVPN; though many VPN sites are now functioning again, reports WSJ. Although we could never prove that this incident is somehow government related, it is certainly fun to speculate about.

How does Technology Impact Music?

My roommate is a music and technology major here at Stevens. The other day we had a conversation that revolved around how technology affects music. We discussed this in terms of creating, distributing, and listening to music. Well as for creating music, traditionally someone would need to play and instrument or use their voice to create songs. Today music can be created on computers, tablets, smartphones. Does this make the musician less talented? I do not necessarily think so. There are great tools out there to simulate sounds and help a musician to compose. With a computer they could compose on the go or anywhere at any time. Musical instruments also tend to be expensive, if someone already has a computer this cost could be left out. In no way am I saying that a computer could replace a musician, just simply that it can be a useful tool for creation.

I think the biggest issue with technology and music today is distribution. It is very rare for people to buy CD's or records, most people just download or stream music online. I really wanted to get my roommates perspective on this topic and she was torn. She said aside from the fact that she likes being able to physically have a record or CD she does prefer to stream music, it is just more convenient. The focus of the conversation turned to how streaming and illegal downloading affects musical artists. She described the situation to be a double edged sword. On one hand illegally downloading does not help the musician make money and on the other hand it gets their name out there. We did not really reach a conclusion, and I would be interested to see what the rest of the class thinks about this. I would like to hear how everyone else thinks technology impacts the music industry.

Amazon's Home Services

I have recently read an article in the wall street journal titled “Amazon Wants to Be Your Home Service Middleman” and I needed to look a little further into it since I enjoy whatever Amazon is doing these days. Turns out that Amazon has started a Service called “Home Services” and its goal is to give users another reason to look nowhere other than Amazon when they are in need something. What Home Services does is it provides a new and simple way to buy and schedule professional services such as home improvement services, lawn and garden care, automotive help, electronic & computer services, lessons of your choice, and many other services you may need for a specific task or problem accomplished. Amazon picks out these services that are located in or around your neighborhood, background checks them, proves they are insured, and licensed for the services they provide. There is officially no more reason to go and search though Google pages looking for a service that just paid to appear higher in the page rank. There is no reason to search through Angie’s list or Yelp for a service that you don’t know their prices. Amazon chooses these pro services that will compete to be chosen by Amazon based on price, quality of services, and their availability. Amazon also matches any price the customer finds that is lower for the same service.  The prices for the service are also given up front, that price is added to your cart, and there will be no surprise costs. Your account is charged once the service is complete, and if you are not satisfied Amazon’s Happiness Guarantee will give you a full refund.

After looking a little further into the services there wasn't much that I couldn't find on there, this is because we are in an area where there are a high amount of services. Other areas that offer a high rate of services are Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Other Major cities offer either medium or light services, low populated area services are coming soon. Some of the most unique services they offer are goat grazers, basketball hoop assembly, printer or game console setup, school lessons, aerial yoga lessons, and the list keeps going. In highly serviced areas they offer over 700 services and this was just released yesterday. I only expect this to grow from here as well.

I feel that what amazon is doing here is definitely the future. I’m surprised that we haven’t seen a service like what amazon is providing us with now. I mean there are services that give you some of these options but I feel that Amazon is the one that is really pulling it all together in a convenient way. I can’t wait to see where they are going to run with this next. This service is great for small and large business to get their word out but I wonder how they will find a balance between each of their services. Are they going to lean to one side or the other? I guess this will be one of many questions Amazon will have to encounter with this new type of service.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/03/30/amazon-wants-to-be-your-home-services-middleman/?mod=ST1

"Insensitive" Youtube Video cause for arrest

            With last week’s discussion on censorship for the Internet, I stumbled across a pretty interesting article. I feel like sometimes we take for granted the endless possibilities the Internet has to offer for us, but that is not the case in other countries. Sunday morning police arrested Amos Yee and at least 20 police reports were filed against him. Now you might be asking yourself what did this 17-year-old do to get this much heat, he made a YouTube video. In his eight-minute long video titled “Lee Kuan Yew is Finally Dead!”, Amos says that the late “Lee Kuan Yew is a horrible person because everyone is afraid that if they say something like that, they might get in trouble.” To give some quick background, Lee Kuan Yew was the President of Singapore until he recently passed away.

            An angry student Yuen Wei Ping filed the initial report. She argued that Amos’ video “made insensitive comments against the late Mr. Lee as well as against the Christian Faith.” In the video Amos also compared the dead President to Jesus Christ by saying both figures “are power-hungry and malicious but deceive others into thinking they are both compassionate and kind.” He also said Lee’s followers were “completely delusional and ignorant, and have absolutely no sound logic or knowledge about him that is grounded in reality.” And if you’re like me, you have heard worse things about our President on the local news channels, so this begs to ask the question why Amos was arrested.

            Singapore does provide the same rights as over here in America. The video’s content was an offence under Section 298 of Singapore’s Penal Code. Under this section, anyone found uttering words “with deliberate intention of wounding the religious or racial feelings of any person” could be sentence to 3 years imprisonment, a fine, or both. Seems like a pretty steep price to pay for running your mouth on social media a little bit. But yet again this is the country that makes it illegal to spit in public, walk around your own home naked, and will fine you for not flushing public toilets.

            The investigations is still on going but Amos made a recent statement challenging the prime minister Lee Hsien Loong when he asked if the latter wanted to sure him for his opinions on the video. “If Lee Hsein Loong wishes to sue me, I will oblige to dance with him.” Hopefully Amos gets away with his absolutely “atrocious” crime but as for now, he continues to stay true to his beliefs.

Unfriended Movie

Take a moment and think about this question – When I say the term “horror movie” what are the first things that come to mind? For some, the first thing they think of may take them back a few decades. Back in the black-and-white days, horror movies were based off of folklore or stories passed down through the generations. Dracula and Frankenstein are a couple I can name off the top of my head.  I, however, believe for the majority  a more modern formula for a horror flick comes to mind. There may be a family or friends involved, but something abnormal starts to happen to them. It could be a ghost, demon, or just some crazy person slashing everyone up to pieces. They’re picked off one by one until the last one or two are left and through some miracle they survive (or not, depending on how sadistic the director is). Throw in a couple jump-scares and there you have it, a modern day horror movie. Though the environment and premise of horror movies have changed, due to the advancement of technology, they all still were similar in the fact that they focused on the people. Sure, there may now be cell phones or computers, but there has never been a horror movie that centered their plot around that technology (at least not that I know of), until recently.

This new horror movie is called Unfriended (also known as Cybernatural or Offline). This movie has been premiered at a couple of film festivals in 2014, but its theatrical release date is April 17, 2015. In the movie, high school student Laura Barns committed suicide a year before due to bullying and ridicule from her other class mates over a video of her at a party. Six classmates were particularly horrible in their treatment of her. Those six classmates decided to have a group chat through Skype, which is when it all goes downhill from there. As stated by a plot summary from IMDb,

While video chatting one night, six high school friends receive a Skype message from a classmate who killed herself exactly one year ago. At first they think it's a prank, but when the girl starts revealing the friends' darkest secrets, they realize they are dealing with something out of this world, something that wants them dead. Told entirely from a young girl's computer desktop, CYBERNATURAL redefines 'found footage' for a new generation of teens. . .

This movie does redefine the horror genre for teens. What I find so intriguing is the fact that it’s based entirely on online interactions. Laura Barns torments these six classmates entirely through Skype. It’s just interesting to me how technology is now being incorporated into the whole premise of movies nowadays. I’m no horror movie expert, but the only thing that I can think of that comes close to this is the Paranormal Activity horror movie series, which was based on camera footage of the family. Even that doesn't really break any barriers, since the found footage genre already existed. This is just my two cents on the movie. I for one hate getting scared, so horror movies are a no-go for me, but this one did have me interested in seeing it for a minute. 

My effort at stirring up another Apple fued

Recent discussions in C&S class made me think of a comedian's video on YouTube I saw earlier in the year. Here's the link. It might be useful for the rest of this post or just a funny video picking fun at Apple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90NJOpjq02M&list=PL0KAgFGmTkxIijiZ93naQh08fKRE2YgMT&index=9

Before I go any further I'd like to say that I don't hate Apple nor am I a disciple. I own an iPhone, iPod, and I had a Macbook before it got too old and I am very happy with all of them. I like Apple as much as the next guy.

A few things in this stand out to me, the first line included. It seems that lately Apple has not been making many groundbreaking improvements in terms of data technology. The new iPhone 6 and 6 Plus did have several cool aspects but to many people, including John Elerick, it was simply making the existing iPhone technology in a bigger package. I for one agree that this phone is too big. Also add that Samsung has used the "new technologies" in their phones for some time now. Not to mention, they've made them waterproof.

Going forward with the video, it brings a thought to my head. Now I'm sure there are plenty of Apple-lovers who will disagree with me on this with certain statistics to back their argument. That's fine, but this is just my viewpoint on the matter. I feel that Apple is relying on the fact that they are Apple and they are already so popular, in order to make money. The Apple Watch is a perfect example of this. As stated in the video, this "combines the technology of a Fitbit and a first generation iPhone." Great...There is nothing spectacular about this watch except that it is another Apple screen. I don't look at this watch and say "wow that's great technology that could be useful." I think, "why don't I just keep wearing the watch I have and do all the other stuff on my iPhone?" John Elerick makes some funny, but fair points in his rant. I think the only people who buy this out of the gate are people who see a new Apple product and feel the need to own it because Apply changed something. Fortunately enough for Apple, they have so many loyal customers that will do this so they will profit well from the watch. I don't know a lot about the ins and outs of Apple Pay, but on the surface it seems that paying via iPhone is still relying on Apple fanatics to just use Apple technology, Is it that hard to pull cash or a card out of your wallet?

The claim remains, and I am forced to agree, that Apple is making strides in design and marketing, not so much in technology.

The Internet of Things is kind of dumb

Tyler’s post last week about the Internet of Things seemed pretty optimistic. This is the opposite of that.

There are positives and negatives to establishing an IoT network. It’s certainly possible to derive some benefit from such a system. Aside from increased quality of life through conveniences, such as having my refrigerator automatically update my shopping list, the Internet of Things could reduce costs through optimization, better organize utilities management, monitor our health, or even the health of our infrastructure. However, an Internet of Things, in which every device is interconnected, is not necessary to achieve these benefits, and carries with it a whole host of problems.

The idea of the Internet of Things makes many devices needlessly complicated. When applied to specific devices, the concept of interconnectivity is fantastic, but the IoT as popularly envisioned is nothing more than a novelty. The Internet has had a tremendous impact on the world, so now people think the Internet is the solution to everything and want to integrate an Internet-like network into their products. At best, it’s just another attempt by companies to add unnecessary features to their products to increase their profits, but even if the intentions behind the IoT are positive, the effects are still negative.

As noted in the final paragraph of Tyler’s post, security issues are a huge concern. One attractive feature of the IoT is the ability to aggregate data. Sensors integrated into clothing and wearable devices could constantly monitor health to provide feedback, based on user configurations, that might lead to healthier lifestyles. Such devices could even be used to help doctors to monitor patients’ recovery even after they leave the hospital, for example. However, such a great deal of biometric data could also be of user for nefarious health insurance purposes by using the data to increase users’ rates.

Even assuming the IoT is standardized in some way, having so many individual devices connected to it would be chaotic. As standards change, problems are fixed, and technology progresses, existing devices would quickly become outdated. Even if there was a way to update them, they would have to constantly be supported, yet companies have little financial incentive to support outdated devices that have already been purchased – getting consumers to purchase new devices is a much more attractive alternative.

The most useful and obvious purpose for these massive data banks is advertising. Advertising is a huge source of income for Internet-based companies, and there is every reason to believe this trend will continue with the IoT. Not only will companies be able to charge consumer more for “smart” devices, but they will even benefit from them. Apart from built-in advertising, the user data generated and aggregated by these devices would be beneficial to the manufacturers directly, as well as open up the possibility for selling it to other companies.

The IoT is an interesting concept, but not all devices need to be “smart.” There is possibly a version of a future IoT that is beneficial, but as it is commonly envisioned now it is just a novelty. It sounds just as dumb now as it did in 1999: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/276870.stm

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/01/smart-tvs-smart-fridges-smart-washing-machines-disaster-waiting-to-happen/

Facebook Drones, A.I., Messenger app and taking over the world

When I used to play football in 8th grade, there was a person who flew a small remote-controlled airplane at almost every practice. So, as you can imagine, when I first heard about drones the image of flying a remote-controlled plane around was the first thing that popped into my mind. What kind of a practical application could that have?

Well, it turns out that I had the idea of a drone wrong. After seeing the promotional Amazon video displaying a drone carrying a package to it's destination, that put drones into a new light for me. Of course, the drone is not implemented yet, but its potential is very high. The beauty of a drone, compared to an remote-controlled toy plane, is that drones can be programmed such that they can fly without any human control: they can be completely autonomous.

The potential is so high, that Facebook is looking to build and implement their own drones, code-named Aquila. The purpose of their drone is to beam Internet access down to the places that do not have the luxury of Verizon, Cablevision, Comcast or other ISPs. With internet access, they'd presumably be able to access Facebook assuming a computer in the customer's possession. The beauty of these drones is that they will be solar-powered, so they will not contribute to global warming. The truly unbelievable thing is that Facebook will be doing test runs as soon as this summer! Facebook's vision is to have a 1,000 drone fleet in the sky. This effort by Facebook is only one of the initiatives that they have taken to access more of the world's population.

To me, it doesn't seem like they're doing this as a "noble" cause (i.e. to better the world by connecting more people via the Internet). I believe their intention is to generate more revenue because, in the grand scheme of things, Facebook makes their money from advertisement views and clicks. Facebook is developing an Artificial Intelligence to better analyze what content can interest the user. If they know this, than their targeted ads can be more accurate, thus making them more money. Consequently, if Facebook has more of a target audience via the drones, they can gain even more revenue.

Take the computers in their data centers for example. HP is going to sell computers with Facebook designs, so that it would reduce the cost for Facebook to purchase. Less cost means more profit. Another example is their Messenger app: they have recently changed the app such that other companies can build apps on top of its current functionality. Again, by doing this, Facebook will have an even stronger base on mobile devices, since these apps are going through the Messenger app.

It seems to me that Facebook is taking a similar approach to Google. Google started out as a search engine company, then began to add News, Images, they purchased YouTube for videos, implemented Gmail for email and took over Android for mobile devices. Google is almost omnipresent on the Internet, and it looks like Facebook is heading in the same direction.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/technology/drones-beaming-web-access-are-in-the-stars-for-facebook.html?ref=technology&_r=0

A New Addition to the Family...

       Back in the day, it was normal to say that most houses had a piano.  Or a pet.  Or night table with a lamp.  But now, it seems we're on the road to having just your run of the mill personal family robot.  This robot named 'Jibo' talks to you like a person.  It gives you friendly reminders, can turn things on and off, take pictures, read to children, and perform many other hands-free commands.  But is this all really necessairy?
       Sure, its convienent.  But with the amount of technological items we have that take over tasks we used to perform on our own, do we really need more?  We already have everything that this robot can do right on our phones in the palm of our hands.  Why do we need to spend hundreds of dollars on the same product in a different shape?
       Also, since when does having a robot read to your kids sound appealing?  You should want to read to your own child.   I don't see a point in having kids if you don't want to take the time to raise them.  We keep looking for answers with things we can make.  But what we should be working out is what we can fix within all of us as a society first.   There's really not much else you can say about this robot in reference to its specifications because they don't really exceed what many other standard devices today can do.  We are funding this project that people are already lined up to order it and I truly do not understand why.  There are bigger issues we could be focusing on, raising money for, and spending time on.  At what point are we crossing the line here?






https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/jibo-the-world-s-first-family-robot--3

Oil assholes

I recently watched an awesome Vice episode that did a story on the major drought in Texas. This drought has become extremely detrimental in the past 5 years and it is starting to have an extremely negative effect of local industry. Texas, specifically the western region, used to produce most of its revenue through agricultural means. Cattle farms and grain farm have been the heart and soul of Texas farms for centuries. Recently, farmers have been forced to sell their cattle and land due to this extreme lack of water. Yes, Texas has always deep a dry state, but there used to be means of transporting water to their farms from states in the north. There has been an extreme standby in the purchasing of water due to the Oil companies demand. Oil companies have been purchasing major amounts of transported water so they can execute there "fracking Process".

"Hydraulic fracturing (also hydrofracturing, hydrofracking, fracking or fraccing), is a well-stimulation technique in which rock is fractured by a hydraulically pressurized liquid made of water, sand, and chemicals. Some hydraulic fractures form naturally—certain veins or dikes are examples.^[1] A high-pressure fluid (usually chemicals and sand suspended in water) is injected into a wellbore to create cracks in the deep-rock formations through which natural gas, petroleum, and brine will flow more freely. When the hydraulic pressure is removed from the well, small grains of hydraulic fracturing proppants (either sand or aluminium oxide) hold the fractures open."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing

Oil companies have essentially bought up all of the available water, leaving the farmers to die out. The question is raised; "Why doesn't the government put a limit to the amount of water oil companies purchase, to allow the farmers to continue growing?". The answer lies deep within the political system of Texas. Unfortunately, the oil lobby in Texas is too strong. They have been supporting the Republican party for years, and they have been given a pass in return. This truly bothers me, knowing that farming is the heart and soul of many of our countries industries. People have been loosing their farms which have been owned by their families for centuries because they are just unable to purchase water.

TimeHop- The Historic Gratitude Journal?

TimeHop is a cool app. If you haven't gotten it, it's definitely worth a look. The idea is that you connect all your social media stuff to the app, and every day it will dig up all your old posts from that specific day of the year. It goes as far back as it can.

One thing I think is really neat is the fact that when I check my TimeHop for things I've posted prior to 2015 I'm often left thinking, "Funny. I was just thinking about that earlier today." Maybe my mind is just a seasonal thing, or maybe time really is cyclical. That's a point for a later date.

Another thing that fascinates me is that I can track what I thought was important to share with the world at any given time. Six years ago, my post from a couple days ago was, "Natalie Barillaro just finished her history paper! Time for some cookies." Now all I post are memes and photos of fortune cookies and shameless promotions for the Dramatic Society (Come see the show! 4/9-4-11 at DeBaun!!).

In 2015, the essay post probably wouldn't have existed unless there were some extraordinary circumstances surrounding the completion of that history paper. Perhaps in 2015 it would look something like, "I sat down to write my history paper, but half of Stevens was on fire. Put the fire out, still handed my paper in before the deadline #yourewelcome."  (Yes, hashtag included).

I feel foolish when I see my posts from the 2009-2011 era (I call them the Dark Years). They were stupid and uninformative to everyone else reading them in the moment. But you know what? In a way, 2015 Natalie is kind of glad that they exist. Back before we knew what to do with social media, we were content to share the dumbest, simplest things with the rest of the world because they were important to us, or because they made us happy. Now most of us know that our primary function on social media is to serve as entertainment for our vast circle(s) of friends, so that's lost on us. I look back in my TimeHop and I find a small gratitude journal. I had cookies on March 23, 2009. I went for a really nice walk the day before. The weather turned nice and I took a picture of the clouds a few days ago in 2010.

So what have I learned? I want to start writing down all the small things that happen to me daily, but not on Facebook where everyone will see and no one will care. If only there was an anti-social media network where I could post all the little things only I cared about. And then I could integrate it with TimeHop and relive these tiny happy things forever.

If you don't Snap it? Did it happen?

Remember when vacations were getaways?  When you wouldn't see or talk to people for an extended period, then when you got back people might have actually cared about where you went and what you did?  Those were the good ol' days.
The annual hiatus of education that is Spring Break just passed and while the time away was appreciated I kept kicking myself when I was still glued to my phone.  Sure the 80+ degree weather in Florida made going on my phone a little nicer, but I did not fly down with some of my best friends just to talk to people who weren't there with me.  More disturbing though is I wasn't the only one; my friends, others on the beach, and yes people on my social networks were doing the same as me.  It seems more and more that an experience isn't complete anymore if you don't Tweet, Instagram, or Snapchat it as it happens, and forget the seemingly now obligatory mass posting of photos on Facebook post trip.

Understandably these companies are going to promote these kind of activities, but some of these advertisements are cleverly disguised.   Snapchat for instance, only a few months ago added what they called "Live" Stories which are curated Snapchat Stories that are organized by the company, combining many users' Stories into a video anyone with the app can watch.  To be honest I have loved watching them, they focus on events like College Football or Music Festivals, and would't you know it they had a Spring Break story that lasted all week and that is when I realized the inspiration for them.  By showing you short peaks into strangers lives, they have formed the most streamlined form of jealousy yet; 1) I wanted to do everything that I saw those strangers doing in the videos and 2) you are damn sure that I was going to Snapchat about it when I did.  This new feature wasn't done to entertain the user, it was done to inspire them to use it more.  In my last blog I talked about how the internet and its users are some of the best forms of advertising for products and companies now, but Snapchat went above that and made one of its core entertainment offerings an advertisement.

So it's not the worst that the conversation for this next week isn't going to be "What'd you do over Spring Break?' but rather "How was Florida?", but the real problem will be when my honest response can't completely dismiss that sometimes I just used my phone with nicer scenery.

NSA to sue Indie Developers over IP Infringement!

So recently, I read about how two researchers were able to hack into the BIOS firmware of a computer, a feat that everyone previously thought was only possible if you were the NSA or some other heavily funded government organization.

I actually wrote about this topic maybe a month ago and I am surprised to hear about BIOS hacking so soon after my other related blog post, especially when it isn’t being done by the NSA. For anyone who is unfamiliar with what the BIOS firmware does, BIOS is responsible for booting a computer and helps with loading the operating system. Business Insider states that, “by infecting this core software, which operates below antivirus and other security products and therefore is not usually scanned by them, spies can plant malware that remains live and undetected even if the computer’s operating system were wiped and re-installed.” In other words, by infecting the computer’s low level BIOS firmware, the malware is nearly undetectable by most antivirus software.

The researchers showed how the hacking could be done by remote exploitation or through a physical interaction. The two researchers discovered what they called “incursion vulnerabilities,” which allows them to access the BIOS. The scary part is how once the BIOS is broken into, a hacker can take control of the entire computer. As these researchers demonstrated, hackers can exploit their newfound power to steal passwords and surveil and steal other data. One can imagine how greatly the NSA must benefit from this kind of spying technique.

It was discovered that out of 10,000 enterprise-grade machines, 80% of them has at least one BIOS vulnerability. These machines include PC’s from Dell, Lenovo, and HP. As a Stevens student who was given an HP laptop upon entering the school, this is even more thrilling news to my ears (I hope everyone can sense my sarcasm dripping from that sentence). As if 80% of machines being vulnerable weren’t enough, here is another great discovery made by these two researchers. Apparently, the incursion vulnerabilities were so easy to find that they wrote a script to automate the process of finding them and eventually stopped counting because of how many were found.

I’m sure the NSA loves this statistic, but now that two researchers were able to gain access to machines using BIOS vulnerabilities, it can’t be long before hackers from Anonymous, government agencies, or other hackers discover this technique and take advantage of it to further harass, pilfer data, and infect corporate, government, and everyday machines.

Still, I haven’t even mentioned the worst part about what BIOS hacking would allow. Once the BIOS is compromised, all the data in that computer is accessible. Despite some people’s attempts to keep their computer’s information private by encrypting their data, it still does not prevent this data from being accessed. The two researchers actually used their BIOS malware to gain access to all the data on a computer which uses the Tails system, an OS (operating system) known for its security.

Knowing that two researchers were able to hack into the chips that run a computer at one of the lowest levels, this opens up a discussion on how users, companies, and governments can protect themselves from something that is so fundamental to the workings of a computer. I hope companies that handle economic dealings such as credit card companies and banks were among the 20% found to have no BIOS vulnerabilities. I also hope that social security numbers aren’t stolen as easily as candy is from a child. Like everyone else in the world, I would hate to find out that my entire savings account and identity have both been stolen due to a significant flaw in nearly every computer.

Now that it has become public knowledge that it does not take inside chip manufacturer information to hack the BIOS firmware of chips, I bet we will see a rise in interest from the hacker communities around the world who are looking to exploit this vulnerability. Hopefully the researcher’s goal of spreading awareness for how critical firmware security is strikes a chord with chip manufacturers and firmware developers so that we can all be saved from a larger headache in the future when hackers have cracked the technique for themselves.

http://www.businessinsider.com/hackers-found-a-way-to-get-into-nearly-every-computer-2015-3

http://www.wired.com/2015/03/researchers-uncover-way-hack-bios-undermine-secure-operating-systems/

Steve Jobs - Celebrate or Vilify?

The man that Steve Jobs was seems to come up often (as it probably should, considering he built a company that is one of the most profitable ones of all time), but it always seems to be a point of constant debate. It seems that nobody, despite what they believe to be true about his character, can stop thinking about his impact on the world and whether or not people should emulate his behavior. It’s almost embaressing to see the amount of back-and-forth there is on this topic, and the man has been dead for 3 and a half years now. You’d think that the man that released his biography (with Steve Jobs’ consent), Walter Isaacson, would have a pretty good account of who the man was in a nutshell—but apparently you’d be wrong.

I’m writing this after beginning to read the most recent biography of Steve Jobs, entitled “Becoming Steve Jobs: The Evolution of a Reckless Upstart into a Visionary Leader”. This biography is fully endorsed by pretty much all of the senior leadership at Apple Inc., and is regarded by Eddy Cue (a senior VP at Apple) as “the first one to get it right”. It is front page news on the iBooks store, as well as getting plenty of  on all of influential Twitter feeds. I’m going to reserve my judgement on the book until I read it, but it seems like all of this press is just a way to recuperate some of Jobs’ “good name” that was seemingly tarnished by other people’s interpretations of Jobs.

Walter Isaacson, as I mentioned earlier, was commissioned by Jobs to write his biography. Jobs (according to Isaacson) was adamant that the account that was written was the truth, not just some ego-inflating piece of work that could be written by anyone. Isaacson’s biography of Jobs is not exactly a flattering approach to who Jobs was, but I think that is the point. Biographies are not meant to tell everyone about the good things you did and just stop there. Autobiographies are notorious for this, simply because when people look back on their own lives, they tend to cast themselves in a light that shows off what they accomplished. Biographies are sometimes incredibly insightful in this manner. They can take a person and expose them for what made them tick. And unfortunately, more often than anyone cares to admit, sometimes the greatest influential people of our time are kind-of jerks in their personal lives.

Jobs was perfectly comfortable with people viewing him in an unflattering light. He openly criticized work, ranted about whatever was bothering him that particular day or situation, and generally spoke his mind when it came to pretty much anything. He was not the kind of person to be put off by someone telling the truth (although sometimes he would take the truth and twist it in his own way). I’m not exactly sure why Apple seems to be on the defensive about Jobs’ personality and what he was like, which is exactly what these endorsements come off as. I’m going to read this new biography, but with a skeptical mind. Of course it seems like “the first one that got it right” to Cook and company—friends always view the people they are close to much more fondly, taking open criticism as an afront to their own memories (which may have been tainted by their reverance for Jobs).

I like Apple’s products, the culture that Apple has created, and I like the things that Jobs was able to do for the world. I don’t have any horse in this race, because I admire people from many different backgrounds and don’t think that Apple is the center of the universe. Jobs’ legacy will never be truly tarnished, simply because the things he did are so influential that they are impossible to refute or ignore. Becoming Steve Jobs is definitely going to be a great read, and if you want to know about the people Steve interacted with on a constant basis, definitely give it a shot. However, Jobs is the exact kind of person that deserves an unbiased biography—and I’m not sure if  will be the one you want to look for to get a definitive account of his life.

Messages in Media

It's pretty tough, dare I say impossible, to avoid sending an overarching message in a piece of media, whether the message was intentional or not. This is because media is created by people, and people are creatures of intent and of emotion. "Wait!" you might protest, "What about media created by computer programs (because those do exist)?" Computer programs don't spawn out of the ether, someone still wrote them, and there is a very high chance that that someone is, in fact, a human being. Even if the creator didn't have some intention, the person viewing their media might garner a message from it, and that message is valid. If I draw a squiggle on a piece of paper, that squiggle just might bring someone to tears because it reminds them of their dear grandfather's squiggles.
I find it somewhat fascinating how some people protest to messages in their media. Someone will point at content that strongly supports certain topics - maybe homosexuality, women's rights, or modern racism - while contently ingesting media that contains less controversial messages - like war from the American perspective. Obviously I can see why people would act in such a way: being exposed to certain things may be unpleasant because they might inspire uncomfortable feelings, and it's always easy to stick to the status quo.
This reminds me of how people will throw certain historical figures on pedestals and throw around a few choice quotes that, of course, uphold the status quo. For example, people love to spout random words of Martin Luther King Jr, they like to present him as the ideal for American activism, and yet, the very people who laud his words never seem to actually try to change things, but King said himself that it was the attempted neutral parties in a conflict that keep change from occurring.
But anyway, I've gotten off-topic: my main point is that everything has a message, complain about the message itself but don't complain about its very existence.

The Best Inventions of 2014.... or Not

This week it was difficult for me to come up with a topic for my blog post.  Usually something will happen throughout the week that will trigger an idea, but over spring break I got absolutely nothing.  Being away from this tech school, I guess I really did take a break from being aware of anything technology related around me!  So I literally typed “technology” and “computers” into Google to see if there was anything interesting that could spark an idea for my blog.  I still found nothing.  Finally, after searching “new inventions 2014”, I settled on a topic.  I found a list of the 25 Best Inventions of 2014 on Time.com.  Usually, I trust TIME to know their stuff, and have good judgement on, in this case, what the “best” inventions are.  I’m not sure now. 

The very first thing on the list is Hendo Hoverboard.  Now do not get me wrong, the Back to the Future trilogy are in the top running for my favorite movies of all time, and I can definitely appreciate a good hoverboard.  The thing is it costs $10,000… uh no thanks.  Unless you’re Bif Tannen in Back to the Future Part Two, I highly doubt you have a measly $10K to throw at a hoverboard, which, by the way, can only float an inch above the ground, and has a battery life of 15 minutes.  So, yes, it’s a great invention technologically speaking, but I’m not sure where the Hendo was thinking they’d get their profit from with this one.

There are familiar things are on the list, like 3-D printers that can print everything, and the Apple Watch, but there’s also things I never thought would need to exist.  For example, Ringly.  Ringly is a ring (what a surprise) that is programmed to glow when wearers get any type of notification on their cell phones.  This product seems to being a hit, seeing as the first 1,000 rings were sold out within 24 hours, but I just don’t see why this is necessary at all.  Us humans are already extremely lazy as it is, and now reaching into our bags to check our phones is too much work?  Good grief.  I think this invention is pointless because, just as a phone rings when you receive a call, your phone can be set to ring when receiving any other type of notification as well.  So you don’t need to go through the struggle of digging through your bag just to check IF you got a notification, if it could simply just ring when you DEFINITELY got one.  Are you picking up what I’m putting down?  And it’s not like the ring lets you know what the notification is, so you would still have to dig through your bag to get your phone out anyway! Come on, ladies.  Use your brains. 

Oh here we go. The Selfie Stick.  The number of these things I saw over Christmas break in Disney World was unreal.  So I understand the purpose of it, I understand that now you can fit a lot more into your frame for your picture, but you look absolutely ridiculous when doing it.  And yes, I am judging you.  The same way I judge people for wearing Crocs.  They may be comfy, but you look like an idiot.  We have become a world where simply asking someone to take your picture for you is too much interaction between people.  It is honestly a depressing thought; the fact that Earth is turning into a giant, antisocial, Croc wearing, Selfie Stick using, matching family T-shirts, kind of place. 

I am all for the progress of technology.  I go to Stevens for a reason.  But if the so called progress enforces lazy behavior, or causes even less physical, personal, interaction between people, then I don’t really see how it’s considered progress.  Ever since freshman year, I have been noticing more and more how technology is taking these leaps, and all of these improvements are being made (they say), but I have witnessed more good than bad.  Maybe it’s because all of the good, new technology is expensive.  So normal, middle class people don’t get to experience those things?  And we get all of the bad, new technology that costs less money, and is therefore used by everyone, becoming the next fad?  I don’t know, just a thought.

Catstacam

The human race has reached the peak of its technology. Coming soon to our feline friends, Whiskas is working on wearable technology that takes six pictures a minute and automatically posts it on our cat's personal Instagram page as soon as Kitty is within wifi range. To make sure that you don't have a million pictures of Kitty napping, the device only turns on when it detects movement. What does this mean for you? You can now cry yourself to sleep every night because your cat will have more followers that you. Instagram has been infiltrated by cute dog and cat pictures - I definitely find them cute but sometimes, enough is enough. I don't think Catstacam should be a thing but if eventually does, I'm probably getting off Instagram for good for the sake of my insanity. I like cats but I don't need to be seeing six of them in a row when I go on Instagram.

The Problem With Mainstream Operating Systems

Mainstream Operating Systems:

GUI Bloat, Confusion, And Restriction

What's the problem? What can be done!?

The Rundown
I work primarily with system development and have had it to the brim with desktop operating systems so much so that three years ago I began developing my own from scratch and others based off existing kernels and more. Why? Some background first...

Ignoring the nitty-gritty of computers and considering it a black box, computers truthfully just need a file system, the ability to handle programs, and a user interface. Nothing showcases this basic functionality than the original command line based interface, or CLI. This interface however is not beginner friendly and discouraging to many. However with detailed knowledge of the system this tool can become very effective. To encourage more people to jump on board with personal computers, the graphical interface, or GUI was the next logical step. The only issue is that this was the Pandora's box of computing and inevitably the death of efficiency.

Now for the point. Have you ever tried to use Windows 8 on a desktop? I needn't say more. Ever get confused as to why Windows has three stock image viewing programs and two media viewers? How about using Windows 7 libraries?  Some may debate it as powerful, yet it discourages organization with the typical user. Maybe Mac is more your flavor. Notice how abstract the file system representation can be? This serves a purpose in keeping average users relatively organized. However, power users may feel their skin crawl off as they scramble to execute "defaults write com.apple.finder _FXShowPosixPathInTitle -bool YES killall Finder" or download another file browser. The Mac interface and options have turned near completely to a one way about things GUI that doesn't let the user really see the system innards. I'm not saying it cannot be customized, but this is not first hand knowledge (nor is the massive heap of short keys available - they allow for good management). Although it certainly does not have the incredible clutter of options to navigate the system like Windows. How about Linux? To be honest, Linux development supports flavors that suit any user need. However driver and software support isn't always on par with Windows. In short, the main systems deem the user somewhat stupid, favor heavily graphic based interfaces, and try to abstract things that really do not need abstraction. This leads to clunky or narrow interfaces which either restrict the system or make graphical management of it confusing or bloated. Although some exist with a happy medium, they do not have the traction visionaries like Gates and Jobs developed. This limited support to these other systems.

The GUI could have been a tool, instead it has become a means of abstraction to let the simplest of users manage by stumbling through the system, or being herded towards something. However, why not make the system easier to understand AND powerful. The algorithms and implementations exist in these systems to perform the following. Open a program, file, or location with a partial search. Open file explorers with simple key. Navigate file explorers with arrows, smart searches, favorites, or auto-completion. Window management with basic key presses that can also include mouse usage. Why not deploy a system that trains the user to use this simple interface that has a desktop and touch version? The answer is simple really. GUI's were an experiment. More and more features were added, or more and more power features were restricted in less and less time in order to mimic competition, explore unknown ideas, appeal to simpler users, or to eliminate user generated problems like trying to speed up windows by deleting system32.

A Sample Implementation And Why
(Inspired by Android, Windows, and Linux Mint!)
So what can done? Simple. Make a system that has pretty intuitive options.Everything is dumped mainly into two highly organized intuitive lists AND is easily searchable. If it exists you'll know it. If it doesn't you wont find it. Management of programs and files will also be very simple and easily manageable. This could enable both new users and hardened power users to happily use the GUI without feeling confused, restriced, overwhelmed, or slowed.

UPON first run it offers to list the shortcuts/tutorial as icons until disabled
The desktop includes toggle-able function icons to perform the listed tasks below, also the times and useful information, however the main search + settings key always remains, like the Windows orb.

Tutorial! The system will run this once and remain a re-runnable icon until the above is disabled

For actions that will perform naughty things, A program notifies the user if they are doing something typically naughty and prompts them with an informative description. For example entering the system folder will warn them of the dangers of modifying files.

To run a program:
1) The installed program list shows by clicking the windows orb then all programs  (modified from stock to be a popup list)
2) OR Windows key + start typing program name enter when recognized (based off launchy)

To close a program
1) click the exit button
2) alt + f4

To snap windows
I) upper right corner: windows key + arrow key combination
(upper left, left, lower left, lower right, right, upper right)
Eg upper left: windows key + up + left

To change a windows size
1) click and drag
2) windows key + shift + arrow key (corner nearest middle... upper right corner app can change by using the bottom and right arrow since it is snapped to that corner on the screen)
3) maximize: windows key + m will maximize the current program or place it back in its tile

Switch windows: windows are only visible in the snapped frames
1) For windows snapped, windows key + 1->4 - THIS modifies alt + tab
2) alt + tab + (click/arrow keys)
This has been modified to list the same program vertically for each instance
3) click window in both alt + tab menu or main screen

To open file explorer:
1) Windows key + e
2) see above
To navigate an explorer like file explorer or an internet browser
I) forward and back:
1)windows key + ctrl + arro
3) click the forward and back arrow
II) search: alt + d, this includes path autocomplete and smart file search
II)favorites or bookmarks or back:
1)ctrl + b
2)click

To open settings:
1) A list shortcut exists showing every windows tool under a category when hitting windows key, this can be arrowed too or clicked
2) Windows key + type settings then enter

Open a setting related to something EG audio without knowing the application name: Windows key + audio then arrow right or click on the small arrow that appears for a list of possible programs
THIS is done by tags.
All settings galore: Each has been simplified to visually easy 2d menus located under categories. Typing will forward to the nearest auto completed option or arrows and the mouse work.

Existing programs: There exist only one program per function. This SIGNIFICANTLY cuts down on confusion since they can be searched by tags or the actual name. They too all exist, categorized by function or the main tag in the menu.

Conclusion
This could rapidly enable a new user to learn the basic functions of the system! While different hardware interfaces may not apply to the sample, the idea stands. Simple systems can be much more powerful as the user has more of an idea of what they are doing, and users that know what they are doing can be enabled by conventional means or a GUI that doesn't feel inefficient. It is unlikely we will ever see this in these titanic systems. This change down could be suicide for Windows or Mac since users want more without knowing what they want. In the end, things are changed to make the appearance of something new whether or not it is even useful.

Checkout Google's stock lollipop unlocked
(Haven't checked IOS 8 yet)
Although companies weigh it down and bloat it, the stock unlocked (rooted) version exists to serve this purpose. Not only is the stock unlocked completely modifiable, it is minimalistic and limits the user to certain interfaces to perform certain tasks. On top of that it takes five minutes to learn. For example, quick settings exist in a pull down (flashlight, wifi, lock screen), a settings menu modifies system settings and is blocked into simple categories, there is one window manager and last app switch button to quickly traverse/close open apps, and the home screen houses apps and is responsible for its own settings. It is a great example and larger operating systems could learn a thing or two from the fully functional yet tiny system installed to so many android devices.