Mars 2020 lander’s heat shield cracks in testing

One of Mars 2020’s heat shields cracked after a week-long series of tests, and NASA has no choice but to ask Lockheed Martin to build a replacement. The heat shield’s purpose is to envelope and protect the Mars 2020 rover and landing system so they don’t burn up when they enter the Martian atmosphere. Since the system will have to endure temperatures up to 3,800 degrees Fahrenheit, NASA and Lockheed Martin (its contractor for the mission) subjected the shield to forces up to 20 percent greater than what it’ll encounter during entry.

Upon inspecting the shield, NASA found what it says is an unexpected fracture near its outer edge that spans its whole circumference. Lockheed Martin now has to build a new one for the mission, but it will also repair the damaged shield, so it can be used for more tests over the next year.

While unfortunate, the event is a perfect example of why the agency and private space companies have to put rockets, capsules and their individual components through rigorous testing first. Better to spend more on a replacement than lose billion-dollar spacecraft. In Mars 2020’s case, the $2-billion mission includes a rover designed to look into the possibility of past life on Mars and to drill into the planet’s surface to collect samples. The good news is that NASA doesn’t believe the incident will affect its target launch in 2020 like what happened to the James Webb Telescope, so it doesn’t have to think of a new name for the mission.

Via: NPR

Source: NASA

Microsoft defends conviction of e-waste recycler over piracy

Many were upset that e-waste recycling pioneer Eric Lundgren was going to prison for creating his unofficial Windows restore discs, and in some cases pointed the finger at Microsoft for its role in the conviction. Microsoft, however, doesn’t think he’s a hero… and thinks it’s getting a bad rap. The software giant has posted a response to critics that characterizes Lundgren’s piracy as fully intentional while simultaneously washing the company’s hands.

The company noted that Lundgren received a customs seizure notice warning him that his activity wasn’t legal, for starters. He appeared to have had a chance to back out and continued regardless. He told his co-defendant to “play stupid” with customs officers, for example. Lundgren also went out of his way to make the discs seem authentic, while evidence suggested that he was interested in profit, not just in reducing e-waste by helping people restore their PCs. There are already programs in place to support PC refurbishing and recycling, Microsoft said — Lundgren’s effort to supply discs was supposedly unnecessary.

Microsoft also stressed that this wasn’t its own action. While the tech firm did offer an expert witness and a letter of support, it was US Customs who referred the case. Lundgren also pleaded guilty, the Windows developer said.

Of course, this is Microsoft’s take on events. It didn’t mention that Lundgren pleaded guilty in part because he couldn’t afford to appeal the case, and glossed over the ostensible reason he was creating these discs in the first place: that people were sending their PCs to refurbishment and recycling facilities when they’d lost or thrown out their discs. Microsoft’s response provides important context, but it’s evident the situation is more complicated than either side would suggest.

Source: Microsoft On the Issues

Study shows Google Assistant is smarter than its rivals

For the second year in a row, digital marketing agency Stone Temple has found that Google Assistant is the smartest digital assistant on the market.

Stone Temple asked approximately 5,000 questions in an attempt to figure out which smart speaker made use of the most intelligent digital assistant and Google came out on top. The company asked the same questions of Amazon’s Alexa, Apple’s Siri, Microsoft’s Cortana, and Google’s Assistant. The questions for Assistant were asked with a Google Home device as well as a smartphone equipped with Assistant.

Google Assistant attempted to give the most responses and provided the most accurate of those responses. Stone Temple also noted that Google Assistant was more accurate on a smartphone than when used on Google Home. Cortana came in second place, followed by Alexa. Sadly for Apple, Siri fell behind the others in terms of attempted answers and accuracy.

While Google’s A.I. might be the smartest, it didn’t improve much upon last year’s showing. Alexa, on the other hand, saw strong improvement over last year’s results. Alexa’s attempted answers rose from 19.8 percent to 53 percent. Its accuracy did fall a bit from last year, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing, considering it more than doubled its attempted answers.

Cortana was actually the only digital assistant which increased in accuracy over last year. In Stone Temple’s previous tests, Cortana received an accuracy score of 86 percent. That number rose to 92.1 percent in this year’s test.

“We are proud of our continued work on Cortana and we’re excited for what the future holds for continued growth, functionality, and availability across devices and platforms,” a Microsoft representative told CNET.

Another issue worth noting is that in order for Stone Temple to consider an answer 100 percent correct and complete, it must be answered “fully and directly.” It turns out there are several ways in which digital assistants can fall short.

A question could have multiple different answers, such as a query regarding the speed of a jaguar, which is both a car and an animal. In such cases, the assistant may have given a correct answer, but not necessarily the one Stone Temple was looking for. Other explanations include the assistant’s responding with a joke or choosing to answer a question it thinks is topically similar to what the user asked. There were cases where the assistant was simply wrong, but those were rare.

Aside from intelligence, there are plenty of other factors to consider when deciding on a smart speaker. If you need some help, check out our guide to the best smart speakers.

Editors’ Recommendations

• Microsoft Cortana can now be activated without the whole ‘Hey’ business
• Apple HomePod vs. Amazon Echo vs. Google Home: Which is best?
• We’ve only just ‘scratched the surface of what’s possible’ with Alexa, exec says
• Amazon is hiring even more Alexa people than Apple is hiring for Siri
• How to use Samsung’s Bixby assistant for all of your smartphone tasks

DNA link to Golden State Killer raises questions of privacy versus safety

When you upload your DNA data to the internet, you can subject yourself and all your relatives to law enforcement DNA searches. That’s what eventually helped California police focus their hunt and arrest Joseph James DeAngelo Jr. as the suspected Golden State Killer.

From 1976 to 1986, the Golden State Killer murdered 12 people, raped 45 others, and committed more than 100 residential burglaries. For almost seven years, cold case expert and retired Contra Costa County District Attorney inspector Paul Holes searched genealogy websites for DNA matches to evidence collected at the crime scenes, according to The Mercury News.

A 73-year-old man in Clackamas County, Oregon had uploaded his DNA data to GEDMatch, an open-source genetic platform. When Holes compared the man’s DNA to samples taken from the crime scenes, he had a hit, but it was not an exact fit. Holes said it was a “weak match.”

Authorities subsequently obtained a court order to obtain a DNA sample directly from the Oregon man, who was cooperative. He was cleared of suspicion, but he and the Golden State Killer shared “an unusual trait.”

In the process of getting the court order, Holes said, “We generated the legal documentation more as a matter of routine, due diligence … But he was willing all along to provide his DNA.”

Subsequent searches resulted in narrowing the investigation to DeAngelo from a family tree with about 1,000 people. In the end, the matches that linked DeAngelo’s DNA to the crime were from third and fourth cousins.

Commercial DNA ancestry-tracking companies require court orders for any files in their databases. Access to GEDMatch’s 900,000 DNA file open database has no restrictions, however.

GEDMatch co-creator Curtis Rogers didn’t know California officials searched the website for a DNA match. “I had no knowledge this was happening,” Rogers said, according to MIT Technology Review.

GEDMatch openly warns users that there’s no privacy guarantee. The site also informs users their DNA data could be accessed for uses other than ancestry searches. Still, the website rule is that DNA information is stored on the site “only with the person’s permission,” according to Rogers.

UC Berkeley Boalt School of Law assistant professor Andrea Roth told The Mercury News, “When you put your information into a database voluntarily, and law enforcement has access to it, you may be unwittingly exposing your relatives — some you know, some you don’t know — to scrutiny by law enforcement. Even though they may have done nothing wrong.”

Concerns regarding the balance of privacy and public safety may be easily answered in the case of the Golden State Killer. Unfettered law enforcement access to our own and our relative’s DNA information has the potential for abuse, however.

“And even though it is easy to think of this technology as something that is used just to track down serial killers,” Roth said, “If we allow the government to use it with no accountability or no further safeguards, then all of our genetic information might be at risk for being used for things we don’t want it to be used for.”

Editors’ Recommendations

• Google Maps is open to mobile AR game developers using Unity
• Finally, an A.I. voice assistant that doesn’t collect and monetize your data
• Google Arts & Culture explores remote world heritage sites in virtual reality
• Facebook was always too busy selling ads to care about your personal data
• Localblox data breach is the latest nightmare for Facebook, LinkedIn

Who wouldn’t want a giant walking robot that transforms into a sports car?

Any kid who grew up watching Transformers cartoons wanted one in real life, and now a robotics company and roller coaster manufacturer have teamed up to make that dream come true. Brave Robotics, SoftBank sumsidiary Asratac, and Sansei Technologies in Japan have created a 12-foot-tall robot named “J-deite RIDE” which morphs into a sleek sports car in less than a minute.

The robot will be displayed on May 5 at the GoldenWeek DOKIDOKI Festa All Working Cars Assemble! festival in Tokyo, and will make its international debut at the IAAPA Attractions Expo for amusement parks in Florida this November.

Unsurprisingly, the CEO of Brave Robotics is a fan of movies and anime featuring giant transforming robots, and he’s been building them since he was a teenager. Kenji Ishida told Reuters Television, “I grew up believing that robots had to be capable of such things, which became my motivation to develop this robot.”

Legendary mechanical designer Kunio Owara also contributed to the design of the robot. Owara has lent his vision and influence to the robot designs in multiple manga and anime franchises, including the Gundam series.

Constructed mostly of aluminum and powered by a lithium battery, the Ride seats two people and weighs in at just under two tons. It can be controlled remotely as well as by a “driver.” The robot’s software, named V-Sido, controls the motion of the robot both in vehicle and walking mode, as well as the transformation between them.

Its maximum walking speed is 18 mph and the company says it can exceed 37 mph in driving mode, although the developers have limited testing to the factory where it was constructed.  In fact, we don’t see the Ride in motion much in the video at all, and it’s a far cry from the Autobots and Decepticons many of us grew up watching.

Ishida admits it’s not practical for an everyday commute, but he hopes the robot will inspire future designers.

According to its website, the company is already working on an even larger prototype dubbed the “King J-deite” that’s more than 16 feet high. Their new creation will be unveiled in 2020.

Editors’ Recommendations

• Spirit animals: 9 revolutionary robots inspired by real-world creatures
• Awesome Tech You Can’t Buy Yet: Haptic bass straps, musical rings, and more
• Latest Festo creations include a bionic bat and somersaulting robo-spider
• The best movies on Netflix right now (May 2018)
• With this browser, ads can’t steal your attention — they have to pay you for it

Google Chat isn’t the next iMessage and wasn’t supposed to be

Google Chat will not fix your morning coffee, rotate your tires, or be the life coach you’ve always wanted either. It will make texting better, though.

Remember way back on April 19, 2017 when the Verge told us about Google Chat? In case you’ve been under that rock we all like to hide under sometimes, it’s a push to get everyone — carriers and manufacturers of phones, tablets and computers — to adopt the RCS universal profile. That means text messages will no longer suck because they aren’t limited to just text and a certain length. It also means you can use whatever app you like and get an experience like WhatsApp with rich media even if the other party is using a different app. it’s like the newer, better SMS and even carriers have incentive to use it.

A look at social media the next morning painted a very different picture.

Bottom line: Google builds an insecure messaging system controlled by carriers who are in bed with governments everywhere at exactly the time when world publics are more worried about data collection and theft than ever.

— Walt Mossberg (@waltmossberg) April 20, 2018

Everyone started to compare Google Chat to iMessage (because of course they did). In a lot of ways — having stickers, emojis, embedded media and even video abilities — it could be. We’ve even compared it to iMessage in that way, because it gives every Android phone on every carrier a way to talk to everyone else that’s not just 160 characters of WYD? and TTYL. But there are some big differences between the two. Big enough that any outright comparison between them is only causing controversy for controversy’s sake.

Google Chat is not an app. It may be built into an app from Google (we know it will but Google needs to get on record on a stage somewhere) but there is no stand alone app that let’s you use Google Chat because Google Chat is not a “thing” it is a name tacked on to a standard.

If it were an app it would be limited to users who want to install and use the one app to talk to other people who use the same app and then send a text or Facebook Message to everyone else. Google tried that and failed. Then it tried again and failed again. Then it (wisely) decided to stop trying to shoehorn people into using just one app for a better messaging experience; let us use the apps we already like that already work with each other and make the experience better.

More: Google Chat: Everything you need to know

On the other hand, iMessage is an app. It is the only app that can use the advantages people are speaking of, and only people with an iPhone or had an iPhone at one time to set up iMessage with a phone number can use it. And if you use it, you can’t drop the SIM card into another phone and send text messages without undoing the connection to iMessage.

It does deliver a very nice experience filled with rich media and video and everything else plus offers end to end encryption as long as both parties use iMessage. For the other 80% of the people on this planet who have a smartphone from a company that’s not Apple it’s back to 160 characters of unencrypted WYD? through SMS. It may or may not end up supporting the RCS universal profile and if it does, 2 billion more people will be able to talk to iPhone users with a newer, better text messaging experience.

Google Chat is also not Signal. Neither is iMessage for that matter because I use an Android phone and Apple has decided that my messages aren’t worthy of end to end encryption through their service. Signal is a great app that acts as a text messenger client, phone dialer, and video calling app using end to end encrypted communications for both parties no matter if they are using an Android phone or an iPhone.

There are apps that offer encrypted messaging to everyone and don’t have Facebook involved, but iMessage is not one of them.

I know Signal is a great app because I use it every day. People deserve to have privacy through encryption no matter what phone they use and Signal does that better than anyone else. If you really care about privacy when you’re texting or making a call you need to use Signal because iMessage is not encrypted when chatting with or calling the vast majority of smartphone users in the world.

For Google to offer the magical unicorn that is universally encrypted rich text messaging, it would need to make yet another app get people to install Allo. Google knows that nobody wants to install Allo because it knows how many people have an Android phone and how many people have an iPhone as well as how many people have downloaded, installed and registered it. That horse is dead and no amount of beating will revive it.

Neither will any amount of drum beating for Apple or claiming Google needs to change the world. You’ll get your Google Chat and you’ll damn well like it. (Seriously, you’ll like it because it will make the app you already use a lot better.)

The best and worst laptop brands 2018

Whether you’re purchasing a $1,500 gaming laptop or a $200 Chromebook, the brand matters. That’s why we rate the top 10 laptop brands each year, based on their support, design, innovation, value/selection and, most of all, product quality.

For 2018, Lenovo retained its place for a second year as the best laptop vendor, but it just barely edged out second-place HP and third-place Dell. Apple, which used to dominate this contest, fell all the way to seventh place, down from fifth last year.

1. Lenovo (86/100)

Lenovo takes first place again this year, on the strength of the company’s fantastic product lineup. From the beautiful ThinkPad X1 Carbon, which was the only product to get a perfect, 5-star review in the past year, to the versatile Yoga 920, Lenovo’s laptops earned the most Editors’ Choice awards of any brand. And a full 53 percent of the company’s laptops scored 4 or higher. However, Lenovo’s tech support scores declined from last year, and stiff competition from HP and Dell made this a nail-bitingly close race.

Best Lenovo Laptops | See Lenovo’s Full Report Card

2. HP (85/100)

After a banner year, filled with compelling laptops such as the gorgeous HP Spectre x360, the powerful ZBook 17 and the affordable HP Envy 13t, HP jumped ahead two places from its spot in 2017 to finish second. With great design marks and the second highest review score, HP gave Lenovo a run for its money.

Best HP Laptops | See HP’s Full Report Card

3. Dell (82/100)

Dell’s product portfolio is a mixture of fantastic premium systems, like the Dell XPS 13 and the awesome Alienware 15, and ho-hum mainstream and budget products. The company earned high marks for its improved tech support, which assigns users personal tech support people who follow up with them.

Best Dell Laptops | See Dell’s Full Report Card

4. Acer (81/100)

With laptops like the Spin 1 and Aspire E 15 in its lineup, Acer knows how to provide premium features at bargain-basement prices. The company can also make bold premium products, as evidenced by the $9,000 Predator 21X.

Best Acer Laptops | See Acer’s Full Report Card

4. Asus (81/100)

Thanks to innovative systems like the Zephyrus, Asus is a leader in gaming. With stunning blue models like the ZenBook UX331UN, indestructible laptops like the Chromebook C213S and great bargains like the ZenBook UX330UA, Asus is also a leader in design and value.

Best Asus Laptops | See Asus’ Full Report Card

6. Microsoft (77/100)

Microsoft makes only a handful of laptops, but all of its systems are first-rate. The company’s innovative Surface Book 2 convertible and the colorful and comfortable Surface Laptop are highlights.

See Microsoft’s Full Report Card

7. Apple (72/100)

Oh, how the mighty have fallen! Apple just doesn’t seem as focused on its laptop business as it used to be. The company did nothing to innovate or even tweak its designs in the past year, and only one of the company’s laptops earned an Editors’ Choice award. However, Tim Cook’s company still has the best tech support you can get.

Best Apple Laptops | See Apple’s Full Report Card

8. Razer (70/100)

If you’re looking for a premium gaming laptop and you have a generous budget, you should look into Razer, which has some really compelling laptops. Those include the Razer Blade and Razer Blade Pro. However, if you need something more affordable, you’ll have to look elsewhere.

See Razer’s Full Report Card

9. MSI (67/100)

MSI is one of the premiere gaming-laptop companies, but it still finds itself in a tie for 10th place, primarily because of very weak tech support. However, the company still has some very compelling products, including the MSI GT75VR Titan Pro, which had the best keyboard of any gaming laptop.

Best MSI Laptops | See MSI’s Full Report Card

9. Samsung (67/100)

If Samsung gave its laptops half the amount of love as it gives its phones, the company would probably fare better. As it stands, Samsung offers a small lineup of laptops that just don’t stack up to the competition. It also has, by far, the least-attractive designs in the industry. However, the tech support is excellent.

Best Samsung Laptops | See Samsung’s Full Report Card

How We Rate Brands

Each laptop brand is assigned a score based on a 100-point scale. Points are awarded in five categories: Design, Reviews, Tech Support/Warranty, Innovation and Value, and Selection. Here’s what each means.

Reviews (40 points): The most important aspect of any brand is the quality of its products. To determine a company’s Reviews category score, we used the ratings we gave its laptops between March 1, 2017, and Feb. 28, 2018. We took the average laptop rating for each brand (Laptop Mag rates on a scale of 1 to 5), converted that average rating to a 40-point scale and then added a 0.75-point bonus for each Editors’ Choice award.

Design (15 points): We absolutely will judge a notebook by its cover — and its sides, deck, bezel and base. Though no two notebooks look exactly the same, each brand has a design language that cuts across its product lines.

Tech Support and Warranty (20 points): When you buy a laptop, you want to know that the manufacturer is going to stand behind that machine and help you with technical problems. We base this category’s score primarily on the ratings from our annual Tech Support Showdown, in which we go undercover and pose questions to all of the companies, using their phone, web and social channels. However, 2 out of the 20 points were awarded based on the quality of the company’s standard warranty coverage.

Innovation (10 points): The laptop market is moving fast, and if you stand still, you’ll get rolled over. For the Innovation category, we awarded points based on the brand’s ability to move the market forward by implementing or developing new technologies, as well as by taking risks.

Value and Selection (15 points): How many different kinds of shoppers does the manufacturer address, and do the products provide good bang for your buck? For this category, we awarded points for offering a wide range of laptop types (budget, business, gaming, etc.) and for providing aggressive pricing.

Scorecard and Winners

• Acer
• Apple
• Asus
• Dell
• HP
• Lenovo
• Microsoft
• MSI
• Razer
• Samsung

Facebook shrinks fake news links in hopes you’ll miss them

Facebook has tried numerous methods in a bid to fight fake news. Not all of them are successful, though, and it’s now clear that they can even backfire. Its decision to flag false stories led to more sharing as those determined to believe the claims were incensed. The social network has a new strategy, though: rather than draw attention to the links, it’s shrinking them. Facebook told TechCrunch that it’s reducing the “visual prominence” of known false stories. You may only see a tiny thumbnail and brief text description for a hoax, but an accurate story will have a large image and bold text. The aim, as you’ve no doubt guessed, is to boost the chances you’ll miss a bogus story while scrolling through your News Feed.

The company is simultaneously improving the odds of identifying those stories. It’s using machine learning to speed up its fact checking by scanning new articles for signs of false claims and prioritizing the suspicious ones for human reviewers. The AI technology should not only save time, but increase the likelihood that reviewers will catch fake news in the first place. They shouldn’t have to sift through as many false positives.

Facebook believes its combined efforts (including removing fake accounts and punishing malicious pages) can reduce the spread of fake news by 80 percent. With that said, we wouldn’t count on these newer methods being effective. The shrinking is only going to help if you aren’t attentive, and it might provoke some readers if they realize Facebook is trying to downplay stories. If nothing else, though, this illustrates the fine line Facebook has to walk: it wants to fight news and avoid controversies, but it also doesn’t want to completely block content unless it’s absolutely necessary.

Source: TechCrunch

Today’s best deals you won’t want to miss

Whether you’re looking for new tech gear or household items, we’ve got you covered.

Today you can get big discounts on the super-popular Philips Hue Color Ambiance bulbs, Twelve South Leather iPhone X cases, and more! Don’t pass these up.

View the rest of the deals

If you want to know about the deals as soon as they are happening, you’ll want to follow Thrifter on Twitter, and sign up for the newsletter, because missing out on a great deal stinks!

T-Mobile and Sprint may announce a merger after all

T-Mobile and Sprint have started and stopped merger talks so often that it’s easy to become jaded about the whole thing, but it now looks like they’re close to a deal — no, for real this time. Sources talking to CNBC, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal have all insisted that the two carriers are close to finalizing a merger agreement that could be announced as soon as April 29th. The pact would reportedly value Sprint at $26 billion and would give T-Mobile’s parent Deutsche Telekom a roughly 40 percent stake in the combined carrier.

Masayoshi Son, the chief of Sprint’s parent company SoftBank, reportedly had a change of heart. He’d brought talks to a halt in November over concerns about valuation, but CNBC has heard that Son sees better prospects through lower corporate taxes and is keenly aware of how much it will cost Sprint to upgrade to 5G. The fiercer competition from newcomers to wireless, like Comcast, might also play a role.

The tipsters were quick to caution that things could still fall apart, and that’s entirely believable when the two have abruptly broken off talks in the past. And even if they do announce a merger, there’s no guarantee it’ll clear legal hurdles. Remember, officials shot down AT&T’s attempt to buy T-Mobile in 2011, and they may do the same for its would-be Time Warner acquisition. T-Mobile and Sprint are considerably smaller than both AT&T and its arch-rival Verizon, but regulators may still see this hurting wireless competition. That might have some merit — we’ve seen T-Mobile and Sprint aggressively one-up each other’s plans in the past, and a combined company wouldn’t face that pressure.

Source: CNBC, Reuters, WSJ