ICYMI: Turbine sunbather, NASA stress test and an aquatic hedge trimmer
Today on In Case You Missed It, Usain Bolt may be the “fastest man on Earth” but he can’t outrun a cameraman on a Segway. An amatuer drone pilot stumbles across a sunbather 200 feet above the ground. NASA puts its 3D-printed rocket engine pump through a grueling series of tests. The UK showcases its amphibious weedwhacker and some delightfully demented genius has recreated the Pokemon theme song within Grand Theft Auto V.
If you come across any interesting videos, we’d love to see them. Just tweet us with the #ICYMI hashtag @engadget or @mskerryd. And if you just want to heap praise on your handsome guest host, feel free to hit him up @mr_trout.
Filed under:
Transportation, Science
Tags: 3d-printing, 3dPrinting, amphibious, canal, crash, drone, GTAV, ICYMI, incaseyoumissedit, NASA, Pokemon, pump, quadcopter, RhodeIsland, rockets, segway, shear, space, UAV, UK, usainbolt, WindTurbine
Watch this self-healing material handle a bullet
NASA-funded research has created a material that could self-heal in seconds. Two layers of solid polymer sandwich a gel that with an ingredient that solidifies on contact with air (i.e. when one or both of the outer layers is damaged). This differs from other approaches that rely on a mostly-liquid compound, or similar, slower techniques. The protective applications in space craft (like the ISS) are obvious, and could add a vital line of defense against dangerous debris. The ISS already has shields to protect it, but reactive armour in the event of damage would be even more reassuring. Back down here on earth, the same material could be used in cars, pips, containers and even phones (beyond scratches). Watch the material get shot and self-heal in the video below.
Via:
Fortune
Source:
ACS
Tags: material, nasa, polymer, self-healing, selfhealing, selfhealingmaterial, space
Study maps where golden eagles are safe from wind turbines
Researchers have completed a novel study that aims to keep help the wind farm industry avoid protected golden eagles. Wind turbine blades kill up to 100,000 birds per year, which is admittedly a small percentage compared to those killed by your cat. Still, the golden eagle is particularly susceptible, considering that around 100 individuals were killed last year by a single wind farm in Altamont, California — and there are only 500 breeding pairs in the state. The new study posits a simple idea: Why not plot both golden eagle habitats and the areas with the best wind farm potential, and make sure the areas don’t intersect?
University of Waterloo and Colorado State U researchers pulled nesting data from various regions in Wyoming, which has second highest golden eagle population in the US. The state is also the fifth largest producer of wind power, so they plotted regions with the highest wind-development potential. The result is a study that shows the best regions for both turbines and established golden eagle nests (below, with the ideal areas in blue). The authors note that no existing wind farms are located in the green regions most preferred by the birds. However, there are many turbines located in the orange areas that have less-than-ideal winds but plenty of eagles.
Though golden eagles aren’t the only birds threatened by wind farms, the study’s authors hope that such a well-known species will grab the public’s imagination and spur cooperation between land-management agencies and industry. More concretely, the maps also provide wind farm developers with extra information to help them avoid the protected eagles. “Our work shows that it’s possible to guide development of sustainable energy projects, while having the least impact on wildlife populations,” said Waterloo professor Brad Fedy.
[Lede image credit: Shutterstock / cristovao]
Filed under:
Science
Source:
PLOS One
Tags: conservation, GoldenEagle, greenenergy, RenewableEnergy, Wildlife, WindTurbine
How much should we trust tech companies?
Last week, the internet was awash with journalists’ interpretations of Spotify’s new privacy policy. Depending on whom you ask, the policy was eerie, creepy or just downright atrocious. While Spotify scrambled to reassure us that it wasn’t really interested in snooping through your photos or tracking your every move, people publicly quit the service, argued with its CEO and generally hated on the company. Such public outcries are now commonplace. But what is it about the industry that evokes such an endemic distrust? Why are we so quick to believe they’re out to do us harm? Aaron Souppouris and Devindra Hardawar try to get the bottom of the matter. Or at least argue about it.
Aaron Souppouris
Our opinion of the tech industry has been like a sine wave over the past decade, oscillating between “good” and “evil.” Something shocking happens, there’s an outcry, we accept it and then something shocking happens again. Rinse, repeat.
I think you can pinpoint the exact date when this wave entered the public conscience: April 1st, 2004. That’s the day Google announced Gmail, the email service that offered a then-unheard-of 1GB of storage and threaded emails in exchange for serving contextually relevant ads. Many were worried that the company was “reading” through private communications, a process that Google assured was automated and anonymized. Privacy advocates, however, pointed to Google’s data-retention policies and use of cookies to show that Gmail was the key for the company to learn more and more about you.
“While Google brags that no humans will read your emails, the entire Gmail program will involve extensive automated profiling of you as an individual,” archivist Daniel Brandt told The Register two days after the service launched. “Google will be sharing the non-identifiable portions of your profile with anyone they choose. If the ownership of Google changes, or there is a merger, the entire personally identifiable profile will be available to the new owners or partners.” Of course, this data collection was only ever for one reason: ads. Companies followed Google; advertising rapidly replaced purchases as the primary form of income for the tech industry; and we slowly got used to the idea that “we are the product.”
Devindra Hardawar
I don’t think it’s too surprising why people freak out about these sorts of privacy violations. Technology companies are becoming more than mere brands; they’re a part of our lives. So if they mishandle the trust we give them in any way, a bit of outrage seems warranted. I realize it’s beginning to seem a bit much — both the consumer and press reaction to privacy concerns can be overdramatic — but ultimately I think it’s a good thing.
As much as today’s companies preach about trying to change the world, they’re still ultimately concerned with revenues. And for ad-supported outfits like Google, Facebook and Twitter, that also means getting as many people as possible on your platform, and learning as much about them as you can. If we don’t pay attention and call them out on bad behavior, then they’ll just push even harder to take advantage of us (remember the outcry around Facebook’s Beacon, which was its first attempt at broadening its influence across the web).
Of course, there’s a danger with “crying wolf.” If we freak out about every minor issue, most people will eventually just stop caring about the controversy. But for now, I think it’s worth that risk to bring issues to light immediately. It would certainly be better though if journalists did more research before they start spreading FUD (Fear, uncertainty and doubt) — consumers can do enough of that on their own.
Aaron Souppouris
I totally agree with you. There are so many misreadings and knee-jerk reactions to privacy policies that are borderline reckless. I guess that’s the price you pay. If you want to be a multi-billion-dollar company, you need to get used to the scrutiny: Corporate distrust is a widely studied phenomena, and tech companies are the new financial superstars. But the fourth estate needs to pick its battles, and it needs to do its research.
There’s also been a shift toward greater skepticism since the 2013 Edward Snowden leaks. There was that one slide, the PRISM one, that said Facebook, Google, Microsoft, AOL, Apple, et al. are handing all your personal information to the government. The program was supposed to be targeting non-US citizens, of course, but as a Brit using a lot of the affected services, that’s not really much of a consolation. It’s hard to come back from that. It’s hard to get used to the idea that these basically faceless corporations have the potential to be so reckless with your data.
Devindra Hardawar
The Snowden/NSA revelations basically proved every conspiracy theorist right, at least when it came to government invasions of our privacy. As a society, we’re now going through a strange period where the internet and the rise of smartphones has embedded tech in our lives far faster than many have predicted, and we’re all trying to get used to the new state of things, even techies. But I also think that means now, more than ever, we should be holding these companies’ feet to the fire whenever possible. What happens over the next decade will likely shape our society for much of the next century, so it’s worth raising questions over things like Facebook’s lackadaisical relationship with privacy, the viability of the “gig economy” enabled by companies like Uber and [Engadget owner] Verizon’s troubling fight against net neutrality.
That’s not to say we shouldn’t be prudent about how we deal with ever-powerful tech companies. An example of a bad response: NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio tried to slow down Uber’s growth in the city forcefully, arguing in part that Uber’s cars adversely affected traffic in Manhattan. That prompted a snarky response from Uber and plenty of criticism against de Blasio by the tech community. The mayor ultimately backed down from that effort. (The city instead decided to conduct a four-month long research campaign on the effect of Uber and other on-demand car services on NYC traffic.)
The result of that whole fiasco? Uber ended up looking more like an embattled upstart rather than the $50 billion corporation it’s become so quickly. And it’ll be even harder for NYC to call the company out for legitimate issues, like the transparency around surge pricing, or the amount of taxes it pays to help support the city’s mass transit system. De Blasio would have been better off focusing on those real issues with Uber, rather than something amorphous like New York traffic (which is crummy for all sorts of reasons).
Sloppy startups
Aaron Souppouris
Uber has also had more than a few privacy issues of its own. It’s representative of startup culture in general, which is definitely not helping the situation. How many companies do we see launch on an idea, rather than a business plan? The venture capital system encourages startups to grow at any cost. The Instagrams, the Twitters of the world, they were only ever about building a user base. They launch with little-to-no idea how they’ll make money, and similarly, they seem to work out both security and privacy policies as they go along. While neither Instagram nor Twitter has given us much cause for concern, there are plenty that have.
It’s easy to forget that established names like LinkedIn have been truly reckless with our information. In 2012, the business-focused social network was hacked to the tune of 6.5 million passwords. While it’s virtually impossible to create a foolproof guard against hacks, it quickly became clear that LinkedIn had some lax security policies, such as storing passwords without salting them, making decoding the hashes a fairly trivial task.
Likewise, while I was quick to defend Spotify’s new privacy policy, it’s the epitome of a startup working out its shit after the fact. For example, the company added a section about what it will and won’t do with your location and motion information… months after it introduced a feature that tracked your location and motion. What’s interesting is that no one questioned the collection of that data when the feature came out, but half the internet lost its mind when Spotify explained it in its privacy policy.
Devindra Hardawar
We’re definitely coming out of a period where startups, and tech companies in general, felt they could use personal data in all sorts of ways without much consequence. That’s changing, though — especially now that iOS and Android do a much better job of alerting you of what information and resources apps are actually using. I’m hoping some of the bigger recent hacks also give these companies pause about how they’re managing data.
Aaron Souppouris
The Ashley Madison hack and the Snowden leaks are perfect examples of how at risk our personal data is. Tech companies need to make clear what data they have, how long they keep it and why they need it. If a company isn’t being clear, the press should do its job and find out what the truth is. Spreading FUD about a company’s privacy policy isn’t shining a light on the problem; it’s just shining a light on the publication that’s overreacting. If we carry on complaining about the wrong things — if we carry on just asking questions instead of finding answers — the real issues will continue to be left by the wayside.
Devindra Hardawar
Ultimately I think you and I agree Aaron; we’re just frustrated by different elements of the dialog. I’d love for the press and consumers to be more educated about the issues they freak out about, so that they know precisely how much outrage they’ll need to dial in. But I don’t have much sympathy for tech companies today, which often seem to exist in their own bubble, unaware of how their innovations might sometimes affect normal people. For now, shouting may be the default approach, but I hope we find more constructive ways to keep tech companies accountable.
Tags: conversation, facebook, gmail, google, privacy, security, startup, startupculture, tech, trust, uber
The traditional flagship is sinking, but don’t count it out just yet
Perhaps the game isn’t over yet, but the $800 flagship is running out of health points.
Smartphones are getting cheaper all the time. Sales of high-end $700 or $800 flagships are generally declining. More people are bypassing carriers and buying directly from OEMs, or picking up unlocked devices from online retailers. Could we be looking at the end of the traditional, expensive flagship phone? Can Samsung, LG, or even Apple keep asking us to pay big bucks for their latest offerings?
What’s going on?
If you look at the last round of flagship releases it’s difficult to see where the innovation is. We haven’t seen many compelling new features in the last few years. The flagship line-up has started to look pretty homogenous and almost everyone owns a smartphone now. When the market stagnates, one of the few remaining options for manufacturers looking to stand out is to drop prices.
People have learned that affordable phones don’t feel necessarily cheap.
The average selling price for an Android phone has plummeted from $441 in 2010 down to $254 last year. That’s partly because of the abundance of budget Android smartphones on the market. The platform has improved and hardware has reduced in price dramatically over the last few years. Budget phones are now perfectly usable, and some mid-range offerings, in terms of price, are competing with the high-end flagships, in terms of specs.
If we take a look at something like the OnePlus 2, which starts at $329, we can see the pressure in the market. It’s not really “the 2016 flagship killer” OnePlus suggests, but it doesn’t look out of place next to this year’s crop.
Price drops come quickly
It used to be that flagships would be sold for nearly a full year at the release price, or very close to it. The prices would only start to drop within a month of the next version in the series, but nowadays they begin to fall pretty quickly after release. The LG G4 has dropped from $600 to $480 on T-Mobile and $470 unlocked on Amazon. You can pick up a Galaxy S6 or S6 Edge for $550 now. The Nexus 6 has dropped to $500 from Google and $490 on Amazon now.
No room for yesteryear’s smartphones where we’re going.
This is yet another reason not to lock yourself into a two-year contract and pull the trigger on the latest flagship on release day. You quickly end up in a negative equity situation, but you’ve still got to pay your smartphone off at the original inflated price.
What are the pros and cons?
There’s really only one big pro that matters – cheaper smartphones for all. But it’s also potentially great for customers to be able to shop around on carriers. In theory, it should drive them to offer better deals for service.
For manufacturers, there’s really only one big con that matters – reduced profits. But is that bad for consumers? You could argue that it will lead to a reduction in R&D, maybe there’s a knock-on impact in terms of reduced innovation, but that could also be self-defeating for the OEMs.
Together, and often the same.
Bucking the trend
There will always be a minority of people willing to pay top dollar for the latest thing. Realistically, that’s based on a mixture of alluring hardware and effective marketing. Looking around for an exception to the dwindling profit rule, Apple is an obvious elephant in the room.
Even the average selling price of the iPhone has declined since 2010. It has gone from $702 to $657 in 2014. But for the most part Apple still fits the old model. It sells its flagship at a premium price and only discounts when the next version is released. The fact it has its own exclusive platform, a strong brand, and high customer satisfaction and loyalty are just some of the reasons.
It’s difficult to argue the demise of the traditional flagship in the face of the iPhone’s continued success, but the Android smartphone market is clearly a different beast.
Can Apple buck the trend indefinitely?
Shifting strategies
We’ve seen a couple of strategies to try and combat this general demise from Samsung, the master of the multi-pronged approach. Two of them look like they might have legs.
First, the trend towards bigger displays as phablets take off has largely been driven by the success of Samsung’s Galaxy Note series. People seem to be willing to pay more for bigger devices and phablets are taking over as the new flagships. LG went as far as to merge the two, with the G3 and G4 being clear flagships that are also phablet sized. Apple jumped on that bandwagon too, because the 6 Plus is clearly superior to the standard iPhone 6.
Second, the innovative curved display design of the S6 Edge led to better sales than anticipated. Apparently, Samsung expected the normal S6 to outsell the Edge significantly, but it didn’t. Considering the Edge was also more expensive at release, there’s clearly still a hunger for sexy new devices that innovate. It will be interesting to see what happens with the S6 Edge+ as it combines both trends and is now the most expensive smartphone in Samsung’s line-up.
Samsung has an Edge over the competition, but for how long?
Still kicking
There definitely is a decline in the traditional flagship phone model. We can see it clearest if we look at something like the HTC One M9. Manufacturers can’t get away with releasing the same phone as last year, no matter how gorgeous the design may be. People want some new features or design tweaks they can clearly identify, even if they are a bit puffed up by the marketing department, or balanced with steps backwards in other areas.
Flagship territory and pricing has also been an uphill struggle for Sony. And none of the up and coming field in the OEM charts, including Lenovo (and Motorola), Huawei, Xiaomi, ZTE, and Alcatel sell phones in the $700 or $800 price bracket.
Having said all that, there’s still room for a sizeable niche of premium-priced phones that offer a mixture of cutting edge features, gorgeous design, and clever marketing. The traditional flagship may be sinking, but you can’t count it out just yet.
(Deal) Get the MMOVE Bluetooth Earbuds for only $32
Nowadays, Bluetooth headphones are all the craze. Even more so for those who go to the gym more often than me (which is everyone). Regardless, wires get in the way, they get snagged on something, then one of the earpieces gets ripped from your ears. So Bluetooth headphones are gaining more and more traction due to the convenience factor.
Today’s deal from AndroidGuys and StackCommerce are for a great pair of Bluetooth headphones. The MMOVE Earbuds provide you premium-quality sound while being sweat-proof at the same time. These Earbuds are similar to the JayBird BlueBuds in that they wrap around the back of your neck, and have a piece that fits into your ear lobe so that the will stay in your ears better.
Here are some of the other features that these MMOVE Earbuds offer:
- Wear them while you workout thanks to the sweatproof, durable design
- Keep track of the battery status w/ the on-screen indicator
- Get maximum comfort w/ a choice of sizes & types of hooks
- Enjoy clear, isolated sound w/ CVC® 6.0 Noise Reduction
- Listen for up to 6 hours without recharging
- Control volume & song choice, take or reject calls & more w/ on-ear controls
- Connect 2 devices simultaneously, like your MP3 player for music & phone to take calls!
If you’re in the market for a new pair of headphones, these are a great option. Normally priced at $49.99, you can get the MMOVE Earbuds for only $31.99; a savings of over 30%. Add in the fact that you get free shipping, and this really is a deal that you just can’t pass up. This deal is ending soon, so be sure to head over to the AndroidGuys deal page and grab these today.
If you like this deal, and want to see more of these, let us know in the comments below. You can find this, and many other great tech bargains through our Deals Page. Backed by StackCommerce, there are daily promos, giveaways, freebies, and much more!
The post (Deal) Get the MMOVE Bluetooth Earbuds for only $32 appeared first on AndroidGuys.
Microsoft shoots down Xbox One Mini rumor
The Xbox One is a large console, but it seems Microsoft is in no rush to unveil a slimmer model. The company was rumored to be launching an “Xbox One Mini” in October, but Phil Spencer, Microsoft’s head of Xbox, has shot down the idea on Twitter. His “not real” statement is pretty definitive, although of course, that doesn’t mean Microsoft isn’t planning a redesign for a later date. Although the Xbox One’s sales are behind the PlayStation 4, it has a slew of exclusives coming out this fall including Halo 5: Guardians, Forza Motorsport 6 and Rise of the Tomb Raider (okay, that last one is actually a timed exclusive). If Microsoft is working on a “Mini” model, it’s more likely to appear at somewhere like E3 next year.
@av_xz Not real.
— Phil Spencer (@XboxP3) August 27, 2015
[Image Credit: Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg via Getty Images]
Filed under:
Gaming, Microsoft
Via:
The Verge
Source:
Phil Spencer (Twitter)
Tags: microsoft, philspencer, xboxone, xboxonemini
Sprint’s offering a year of free service for DirecTV customers
DirecTV and AT&T are sitting in that proverbial tree, but that isn’t going to stop any telecom competitors from throwing rocks their way. Case in point: Sprint is running a promo that gives DirecTV customers a year of free cell service by switching to the Now Network. Of course you need to either be a new customer or adding an additional line of service through the telco, and even then it has to be either a Sprint Lease, iPhone Forever, Easy Pay or you have to cough up full retail price for a phone to take advantage of this. If you qualify for this sweet action you’ll need to upload your recent satellite bill to the carrier’s website. A $36 activation fee applies as do taxes and service charges that accrue on a monthly basis. Should you want in on this deal it’d be wise to hurry as it ends September 30th.
The barbs don’t stop with the deal itself, as even the PR quote’s tossing a few at AT&T and DirecTV’s way:
“DIRECTV customers love their TV service – but they shouldn’t have to settle for AT&T wireless,” said Kevin Crull, chief marketing officer, Sprint. “Why not build the perfect bundle by combining with Sprint wireless? We’re winning awards across the country because our network has never been stronger, faster or more reliable, and our customers have never been more satisfied.”
We are celebrating the DIRECTV-AT&T merger! @DIRECTV Customers Can Get up to 1yr FREE Service by Switching to @Sprint http://t.co/Sq6dOSDLoe
— Sprint News (@sprintnews) August 27, 2015
Filed under:
Cellphones, Mobile, SprintSource:
SprintTags: att, directv, effyou, free, mobile, mobilepostcross, shade, sprint
Beats 1 Lead Executive Ian Rogers Leaves Apple
Apple Music senior director and former Beats Music CEO Ian Rogers has resigned from Apple nearly two months after the launch of Apple’s streaming music service, the company confirmed to the Financial Times today.
Rogers was among a group of executives that joined Apple last year when the iPhone maker acquired Beats for $3 billion. Rogers’s official title was Senior Director of Apple Music, a position he held since August 2014, according to his LinkedIn profile.
Rogers, who served as Beats Music CEO between January 2013 and August 2014, departed Apple to join an undisclosed “Europe-based company in an unrelated industry” on the west coast. He is credited for hiring Beats 1 DJ Zane Lowe, who worked at BBC Radio 1 from 2002 to 2015.
Beats 1 is a 24/7 streaming radio station built into Apple Music, featuring a mix of the latest music and guest appearances from artists such as Drake, Dr. Dre, The Weeknd, Eminem, Pharrell Williams and others.
Google polishes app search results with a new UI
If you have been looking for an app using Google’s mobile search lately then you may have spotted a new, colourful results layout, showcasing the most relevant apps from the Play Store. As well as looking nice, the update is also pretty handy if you’re looking for a specific type of app.
The results display some useful app information, including the number of downloads the app has and its rating in the Play Store. There is also a little drop down button below the results to see more apps that match your search results. The colors keep up with the Material Design scheme that Google is pushing for mobile.
To get the new layout to appear, you only need to enter a query into your Android browser, any browser will work, followed by the word “apps”. Interestingly, this new layout appears to be platform specific. Typing in the same results into different browsers on PC or Apple products doesn’t return the same results, but this makes sense as the links take you directly to the Play Store.
See also: Google will now show real-time tweets in Google Search results on mobile
If you haven’t noticed the new design yet, it’s likely that Google is gradually rolling the update out to different regions. What do you think about the new look app search results?
AIVAnet 