Home
About
Help
Feedback
|
The Harrow Technology Report
Insight,
analysis, and commentary on the
Copyright © 2001-2005, Jeffrey R. Harrow. All rights
reserved.
As Innovation & Privacy Collide.
Listen to this
Issue.
Quote of the Week.
Changing The
"Privacy Rules!"
There's MUCH More
I Can Do For You!
CD/DVD Labeling,
Redux.
From Out of the
Ether...
Version 2.0 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! http://www.theharrowgroup.com/articles/20040329/20040329.mp3
Quote of the Week.
Your contemporary CPU is probably built of 55 million tiny transistors whose' average feature is 130 nanometers (billionths of a meter) in length. But look what's coming -- soon!
"[Intel] will begin to ship chips made on the
90-nanometer manufacturing process by the end of
this year [containing 125 million transistors -
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040201/
"Intel Chips to Do Double Duty" What this means is that we can now expect commodity CPUs with a BILLION transistors (compared to today's mere 55 million), not in the year 2010 as expected just a couple of years ago, but in 2007 - only three years from now! And as chip manufacturers continue down Moore's Law's road beyond 45 nanometer chips, down to 22 nanometer features and smaller, today's chips will seem as quaint as the 1971 Intel C4004, the first single chip microprocessor.
It contained 2,300 transistors (no millions or billions here!). It churned out 60,000 operations per second (compared to today's nine billion operations per second). And it ran at a clock speed of 108 kilohertz - that's 0.108 megahertz, compared to today's 3,200 megahertz (3.2 gigahertz)! All that progress, in but 33 years... (For an interesting visual retrospective of CPUs from then to recent history, check out http://www.zianet.com/kromeke/pastcomp/cpu_photo.htm put together by Mike Kromeke.) Oh - by the way, as trivial as that C4004 chip seems today, note that it performed as well as the 18,000 vacuum tube ENIAC of its day! Considered in that light, all it would take for today's billion-transistors-on-a-chip estimates to fall far, far short, is another (dare I use the term) "quantum leap" either through our learning to harness quantum computing, or through some other path. (Just remember - who would have imagined something like a transistor replacing a vacuum tube!) Whatever you do -- Don't Blink!
Changing The "Privacy Rules!"
This is one of a series of articles that I've recently written for Future Brief (http://www.futurebrief.com/). It's a new site from New Global Initiatives (http://www.ngiweb.com/) that offers brief summaries and other resources to help people, especially those on The Hill who form national policy, to keep up on technological innovations -- but with an added twist. Future Brief "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). I'm pleased to be able to share these insights with you here.
Most of us ASSUME that we have at least the 'privacy of anonymity' when we're out and about - after all, if we're not movie stars or (especially now) politicians, who would really care about taking our pictures? Oh, sure, since the days of the Brownie it was possible for someone to "steal our soul" in a picture, although given the lack of zoom lenses in those early days we'd have a fighting chance of noticing. Also, in those olden days, pictures could be taken but there was no immediacy in their use. Film had to be developed, prints had to be handed around, and other physical barriers prevented this from being much of an issue. Today, however, in a rapidly
growing world of "PhoneCams" and more, the rules are
different. Someone surreptitiously taking a
PhoneCam shot of you could just as easily be looking
up a note or appointment or phone number on their
cell phone (since it can be held in a normal manner
and not "up to the eye.") And, perhaps most
significantly, since most PhoneCams can be set to
automatically, and instantly, publish the pictures
they take on a public Web site, the result is
irretrievably, and immediately, "out there" for the
world to see. (Which means that the old "detective
movie ploy" of an aggrieved photo subject ripping
the film out of a camera to preserve their privacy,
is now relegated to old movies.) Some businesses
take the related threat of industrial espionage
through pictures so seriously that they're already
banning PhoneCams from the premises (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/ So "privacy in public," and eventually privacy in the workplace, may already be "dead," but hasn't quite yet noticed its changed situation. Yet this form of a technological loss of privacy, and of others we'll see below, are only the beginning of technology's "changing the Privacy rules":
This Is No Key Ring! Consider this excerpt from a Jan. 12 CNN.com report describing products introduced at the recent Consumer Electronics Show (CES):
"Philips introduced a digital camcorder the size of a key ring, including a 1.5-gigabyte hard drive that can store up to 24 minutes of video. The device, roughly the size of a Pez candy dispenser, can also hold digital photos or MP3 songs."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/01/12/
Truth Or Consequences. How about this excerpt, from the same source: "One little gadget debuting at CES claims to put truth detection voice analysis on the bridge of your nose. "Voice Analysis Eyeglasses" provide real-time analysis on the inside of the lenses about whoever is talking at the time, says its maker, the Israeli company Nemesysco, which developed the technology for counterterrorism and government customers. "A chip inside the glasses is able to read the voice frequency of the person you are talking to," said Beata Gutman, a spokeswoman for the company. "The voice is analyzed through that chip and there are lights that indicate whether the person is lying." (I've read that similar technology has proven about 85% effective, but of course I wouldn't take bets on how well, and reliably, such a device might work without extensive testing.)
No Fooling THESE Parents (Or Employers)! Or, consider this from the Jan. 20 Mike's List (http://www.mikeslist.com/76.htm): "A new service available in Australia called Text Track enables parents, employers and others to find out roughly where a phone is by querying it via SMS. The phone replies with an SMS message revealing the location without ringing or notifying the [person carrying the cell] phone. "Zones" can be set up -- for example, if junior is grounded from going to the mall, that location can be flagged -- and parents get a message if the zone is violated."
Turning The Tables. For another example of how technology is invading our previous ideas of "privacy," consider some "fun" that Engineering Professor and long-time cyborg Steve Mann, of the University of Toronto, has as he exploits his built-in Internet-connected computer and eye-mounted display with built-in video camera -- he "turns the tables" on big business:
"...Mann has created performance art by shooting video in stores that prohibit it, using handheld cameras more noticeable than the "EyeTap" ocular computing system he normally wears. When employees tell him filming is not allowed, Mann points to the stores' own surveillance cameras behind darkened domes in the ceiling. Then he tells the employees that "HIS manager" makes him film public places for HIS security -- how does he know, he tells them, that the fire exits aren't chained shut? -- and that they'll have to talk to HIS manager."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/ On a lower technological note, certain PC-based answering machines (and other devices) allow you to record your phone conversations - imagine the consternation of many a business who has just told you that "This conversation may be monitored or recorded for quality assurance purposes," if you say the same right back to them! (Check the legality of this in your area, of course.) The point is, technology can give as it takes away.
Your Car May NOT Be Your Friend! Speaking of a lack of privacy, consider that, according to the Dec. 11, 2003 NewsMax (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/12/10/213653.shtml), court records have revealed that law enforcement agencies have already been using GM's "OnStar" in-car communications system to surreptitiously listen in to conversations in the car during a non-terrorist criminal investigation! And OnStar is built-in to most new GM cars. Although the FBI lost this particular court challenge to using OnStar, it wasn't because the court was concerned with the invasion of privacy issue, but only because the, "...OnStar passive listening feature disables the emergency signal, the very life-saving call for help that the advertisements tout as the main reason to purchase the system." So presumably, once they figure out how to listen-in without disabling OnStar's emergency functionality, they'd be free to do so again. By the way, are you SURE that such functionality isn't buried deep within your cell phone?
The Bottom Line. Most of us don't want to give up our (at least illusion of) privacy, and many believe that there should be stringent laws in-place to protect people against illegal access to, and use of, legitimately private information. But it's hard to take a position on whether these changes are 'good' or 'bad,' because the now-common commodity technologies of PhoneCams and GPS and "cars that talk" have simply rendered a lack of privacy as reality. Not to mention infrared cameras that can see indoor "growing rooms" in a house from the street. And Ultra Wideband (UWB) radar that can now see through walls. And consider technology similar to that used on televised football games to allow virtual replays from any point on the field -- it's now being applied to "...combine the video from many [surveillance] cameras into a 3D model of an area. Instead of watching the world through a soda straw [many screens from many individual cameras], this is essentially taking video and putting it into context... [Grab a Video Flashlight joystick] and you can swoop down hallways and fly around buildings, immersing yourself in a [real-time] scene [put together from many cameras]."
(See "Seamless Surveillance" in the Feb., 2004
Technology Review at
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/ And more. Like the proverbial genie, it's unlikely that these technologies will be tricked back into their bottles.
It's A Two-Way Street. In a somewhat satisfying "counter" to today's wide (and growing) deployment of surveillance cameras, today's devices and future commodity "Eye Taps" that augment our senses may help "even the odds" by allowing many more people to more comprehensively capture inappropriate actions by those who appear to abuse their power -- remember the Rodney King videos, for example. And, just wait until software gets better at auto-analyzing the terabytes of video and audio that we'll all be collectively producing -- perhaps eventually creating a "Video Flashlight" virtual view of the real world from the data captured by the millions of expanded-PhoneCam-carrying people... I don't relish the dark side of where this could lead, but the technologies to let everyone (or other persons) record their lives 24x7x365.25 if they wish, are steadily moving forward. Let's be sure that as these technologies mature, we implement them into our societies in ways that we can, quite literally, live with.
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 CD/DVD Labeling, Redux.
Last issue we explored two interesting ways that CDs and DVDs can be labeled without using the stick-on labels that apparently have the potential to accelerate data loss from a disk (www.theharrowgroup.com/articles/20040223/20040223.htm#_Toc65053021):
·
The first is HP's idea of putting a
special laser-burnable coating on the top (label)
side of a disk; you burn the data onto the disk in
the normal manner, and then turn it over so that the
drive's laser can now "burn" the graphic image onto
the label side. [By
the way, reader Mark Heslin subsequently asked me
how we might label double-sided disks, where both
sides of the disk must be kept clear for the data.
I suggested that HP's technique might also be usable
on the "hub" area (where no data is ever written),
unless the laser can't track inwards that far. · The second method is by using normal inkjet printers that have been modified to accept a CD as well as normal paper, and printing the label directly onto the special ink-absorbing layer on the disk's label side.
And More... But of course there are other ways to label these disks (beyond felt markers (see below), or stick-on labels, or professional bulk processes), and reader Tom Stewart brings two more to our attention.
·
The first, which I didn't include last
issue because it requires a special-purpose CD
printer and seems more appropriate to larger "small
runs," is the standalone thermal-transfer CD
printer, such as the "Inscripta" from Primera
(http://www.primera.com/pdf/Inscripta%20Brochure%206.4.03.pdf).
It looks much like a thick CD drive, but it has the
ability to print two-color (black and one of eight
colors, depending on the ribbon installed)
professional labels on the "top" of standard (not
specially coated) disks.
·
It's the second method, though, that I
find really innovative (even if the HP solution
seems far more viable). Yamaha's "DISCT@2"
technology (http://www.yamahamultimedia.com/yec/tech/discta2_01.asp#)
also uses its laser to burn visible graphics onto a
disk, but in this case it burns the graphics onto
the DATA SIDE of the disk (the "bottom"). < @___o w < ___| / > <^^^^^ | / > < | | > < \***\\ / | ^^ / )---\\ \___< /_ mm
\___)) Details of the process are at http://www.yamahamultimedia.com/yec/tech/discta2_01.asp# , but it generally works like this. For those of us used to vinyl records, we expect content to be written from the outside of the disk inwards, towards the center. In the case of CDs and DVDs however, data is written from the inside (near the hub) outwards. This means that if a disk is not full, the outside area of the data side of the disk is a uniform color. Take a look at one of your CDs that is only about half-full. As in the picture above, you'll see that the data area, from the hub outwards, has been modified by your laser to contain data, while the outer area is "blank." What a CD/DVD burner with Yamaha's DISCT@2 installed does, is to use the normal CD/DVD drive's laser to write special "data" onto the unused outer area of the data side (the "bottom") of the CD so that the laser marks appear as human-readable text and pictures (a "tattoo"). (It's not really "data" from the CD's perspective, and can't be read by a reader, but it can be read by you!) This is particularly innovative because it uses the laser that's already there; it works on all writeable disks (no special coatings); and the disk doesn't even have to be turned over as is the case of the HP solution. But the downsides are that it won't work on mostly-full disks (which have written their data all the way towards the outside of the disk); the label is on the "bottom" of the disk, which may confuse some people; and the images have very variable contrast, depending on the type of dye used on a rewriteable disk: • "Azo: Blue or Deep Blue. DiscT@2 images can be burned with high-contrast on Azo media. • Cyanine: Light Blue, Light Green, or Yellow. DiscT@2 images on Cyanine dye resemble a light image or hologram. • Phthalocyanine: Silver or Gold. DiscT@2 on this media resembles a watermark." Nevertheless, for certain applications, this type of labeling might be your cat's meow.
The Mark Of The Markers. Another thing we found out last issue (www.theharrowgroup.com/articles/20040223/20040223.htm#_Toc65053020) is that we apparently should NOT mark our CDs with, "...harsh solvent-based markers. Water or alcohol-based markers are apparently OK, but not those based on toluene or xylene, because they can penetrate the lacquer and damage the essential reflective metal beneath it." But as reader "Ohio_Day" pointed out, most retail markers don't tell us if they're based on those potentially harmful chemicals. So he pursued the issue with consumer.service@sanfordcorp.com which yielded the following paraphrased answer: Neither the Sharpie (alcohol-based) nor the Power Mark (water-based) markers contain xylene or toluene. This can be found on our MSDS which is available on our website at www.sanfordcorp.com . Well, I feel better now, since I've been using Sharpie markers to mark my CDs for years! Thanks, "Ohio_Day."
The Implications Go Much Farther... You may never, personally, care about labeling the disks you burn, but regardless, these examples of innovative and very different ways of accomplishing the same goal exemplify the sprit of human innovation. May it live long and prosper.
From Out of the Ether...
Commenting on our recent discussions of wireless RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification) tags (www.theharrowgroup.com/articles/20040223/20040223.htm#_Toc65053016), reader Mark Smith brings up a very good point: "... With this RFID technology, if I'm a crook, will I be able to wander around parking lots or scan airline luggage carousels for RFID tags of items I am looking for (expensive cameras, high tech gadgets, etc), and so more carefully target my theft? I'm just wondering what the implications of this technology are for privacy and security concerns related to property." That's very good food for
thought. I know that some efforts are underway to
use cryptography to hide the data in RFID tags from
prying eyes (reader Bob Ruigh points us to
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/35852.html,
while RSA's Steve Telsey points us to more detail at
http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/staff/bios/ But we also know that especially in these days of exponentially growing processor power, previously secure codes tend to fall to new onslaughts. This is surely one area that deserves ongoing attention before a pocket "reader" announces the value of the things in your car trunk or suitcase or home -- or the amount of cash in your wallet or purse...
Version 2.0
Finally, this is a great
commentary on how the technology and software
industries have impacted our society. It seems,
according to the Feb. 1 CNN.com
(http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Midwest/02/01/ Rejecting typical naming conventions for one he was more familiar with, Jon Cusack formally named new son: Jon Blake Cusack, 2.0 Really! And then there's 2.0's Birth Announcement. According to Cusack 1.0, "I wrote in the birth announcement e-mail [that 2.0 has] a lot of features from version 1.0, with additional features from [his wife] Jamie..." Won't THAT flummox a lot of forms that only allow "junior," "II," and the like? (Of course the really hard part was convincing his wife to go along with this new nomenclature!) "Change" is certainly in the air, even when it comes to baby names. And I can't help wondering, when gene therapy comes of age, if various updates might raise 2.0's suffix to 2.01, 2.02, or eventually 2.999?
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)
