From disasters to freight, this driverless fuel cell platform has it covered


reader comments
0

On Monday, General Motors gave us a quick look at a new fuel cell EV platform it’s developing, called SURUS. It stands for Silent Utility Rover Universal Superstructure, and it’s a large driverless vehicle—about the size of a shipping container—that GM thinks could work in a range of applications, including mobile and emergency power generation, cargo delivery, and even military use. We weren’t allowed to take any photos of it, but on Friday GM made it public.

SURUS is powered by GM’s latest hydrogen fuel cell system. The company has been working with Honda since 2013 on the technology, and it plans to commercialize it within the next five years, targeting commercial and military buyers. “SURUS redefines fuel cell electric technology for both highway and off-road environments,” said Charlie Freese, executive director of GM Global Fuel Cell Business. “General Motors is committed to bringing new high-performance, zero-emission systems to solve complex challenges for a variety of customers.”

It’s also a testbed for GM’s autonomous driving program since there’s no need for a crew cabin, just a flat load bed on top. As you’ll see from some of the pictures, with a container on top it looks quite a lot like the driverless freight haulers we saw in Logan earlier this year, although at least one configuration does include a cab at the front.

Both axles are steerable, and each gets its own electric motor. Although the technical specifications released thus far are not comprehensive, GM says that SURUS will store enough H2 for more than 400 miles (643km) of range. And the fuel cell will also work as a mobile generator, outputting high voltage AC, DC, or 120V AC in addition to sending power to the vehicle’s lithium-ion batteries.

Listing image by General Motors

from Ars Technica http://ift.tt/2yvy5Sg
via IFTTT

Tim O’Reilly on why the future probably won’t be all that terrible

Enlarge /

Some classic O’Reilly titles. (OK, not really. But honestly these titles

would

teach some folks very valuable devops skills.)


reader comments
3

Author and long-time friend of Ars Technica Rob Reid recently had the opportunity to interview legendary publisher Tim O’Reilly about O’Reilly’s new future-focused nonfiction book. Given O’Reilly’s importance and influence—and who hasn’t consulted at least one of his company’s animal-covered books to shed light on some difficult bit of tech?—we asked Rob to write us a summary of the interview that we could share with the Ars audience. The full interview is embedded in this piece.

It’s almost impossible to overstate the influence Tim O’Reilly has had on tech over his career’s long span. But I’ll try. First, he’s the preeminent publisher in a modern field that inhales books despite their ancient form as software developers, IT folks, and others constantly race to keep up with the languages and skillsets of their fields. He also launched the first commercial website long before Netscape or Yahoo even incorporated (prefiguring another huge trend: AOL bought that site, then immediately screwed it up).

Convinced the Web would be hot, his company convened the summit at which Marc Andreessen and Tim Berners Lee first met. He later hosted the conclave whereat “open source software” was quite literally named, and the open source movement’s precepts were enunciated. Though he didn’t coin the term, Tim (basically) named the Web 2.0 era, and also defined it with a wildly influential article and conference series. He later published the magazine which gave us both the word “maker” and the Maker Faire, and he still sits at the heart of the maker movement.

Having failed to overstate Tim’s significance, I’ll now tell you about his new book, WTF, which comes out today. As we all know, this stands for “What’s the Future.” As Tim points, “WTF” can be a cry of either dismay or amazement. An optimist by nature, he’s trying nudge us toward the latter, despite the overwhelming 2017-ness of things. I recently caught up with Tim for a wide-ranging discussion of his book, the future, his personal history, and the true meaning of WTF. Our interview is the latest episode of the After On podcast. You can listen via your podcasting app (just hit Search and type in “After On”), or by clicking right here:

Picture the future

I’m not a book reviewer and this is not a review—though I will say that for me, Tim’s book is a feast. Part memoir and part forward-leaning manifesto, it’s full of contrarian insights and fresh lenses for framing tech’s ever-baffling trajectory. All is backed up with data, facts, and first-hand reports from Tim’s decades on the front lines. And it’s steeped in a level-headed positivity that elegantly rebuts the sudden knee-jerk pessimism of a community which (let’s face it) has it pretty good, compared to most humans across history.

An example: though I admire the man, Jaron Lanier once wrecked my day by eloquently observing: “At the height of its power, the photography company Kodak employed more than 140,000 people and was worth $28 billion dollars. They even invented the first digital camera. But today Kodak is bankrupt, and the new face of digital photography has become Instagram. When Instagram was sold to Facebook for a billion dollars in 2012, it employed only thirteen people.”

In our interview (and also in his book), Tim quashes this perspective, which he gently labels “impossibly wrong.” Instagram is but a wee epiphenomenon, a glittering but tiny speck on the hull of a leviathan transformation—one which has created untold millions of jobs (and, yes, destroyed millions of others). “Think of the mountain of work that’s required to bring us Instagram,” Tim says. “This massive economy of data centers. Of Internet connectivity. Of the manufacturing of phones, which are more ubiquitous than cameras ever were. And think about the number of little shops there are, everywhere, selling cell phones. How many people work for Comcast, T-Mobile, Sprint, and all the [other] carriers. And all of the cable that had to be laid… just immense amounts of work in order for that Instagram culture to exist.”

Humans as technology’s gut bacteria

This isn’t to say Tim lacks empathy for the dislocated. Indeed, he brims with it, and is flat-out denunciatory when discussing modern inequities. He likens emergent aspects of our world to algorithms pursuing master “fitness functions.” Much as Google is geared to maximize ad revenue, the markets drive companies to maximize profits at the cost of all other goals and values (he goes so far as to liken the financial markets to a rogue AI). All of this notwithstanding, Tim remains highly invested in the free market system. He’s an entrepreneur with 400 mouths to feed at O’Reilly Media, after all—a trick he manages quick well.

Tim talks deeply about platforms in our interview, and what he calls “thick marketplaces.” He extends this definition beyond literal markets like eBay to more figurative ones, like the Microsoft ecosystem of the 90s. Those who desecrate their marketplaces by devouring participants they should empower—again, think Microsoft in the 90s, or more recently, Twitter—do so at great ultimate cost to themselves.

“Think of the mountain of work that’s required to bring us Instagram,” Tim says.

Our interview touches on the fascinating notion that humanity could be viewed as a microbiome for massive techplexes like Google and Facebook. I’ll admit to a weakness for this concept, as I developed it independently in my most recent novel (where my treatment is more playful than Tim’s, though I take the idea very seriously). In the 90s, he was struck by how certain engineers were being deployed almost like software components within organic, ever-evolving “applications” like Yahoo. Back when applications generally traveled as physical totems frozen onto discs, this was a true WTF moment.

Tim has since watched this symbiosis grow ever deeper. AI applications are now often trained by humans via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk service. And consider how Google gets smarter whenever we choose one link over the others on a page—then either snap back to Google because the link wasn’t suitable, or vanish because it was. “So there’s a symbiotic intelligence,” he points out. “There’s people inside it—the programmers who write the algorithms and manage the workflows. And then there’s people outside, who are communicating with it.”

We are the powerhouse of the cell

It gets deeper when companies like Uber and Lyft bridge into the physical world. At Lyft headquarters, you might view software components as being like workers in a factory, with programmers for managers. Managers who get signals from customers and the market, and continually coach their components to do better jobs. The components themselves manage another level of worker—the drivers—who are actually “augmented workers,” their capabilities heightened by digital tools like mapping services. Tim calls these sorts of companies “compound organisms,” or even “compound beings. He compares them to mammalian cells, which long ago teamed up with sovereign organisms, which are now our mitochondria (your mitochondrias’ DNA is distinct from your own, attesting to its indie roots).

All this could lead to bad outcomes to those on the lower rungs. But it could also lead to wonderful ones (consider how psyched we should all be to live on this side of the past century’s breakthroughs—societal imperfections notwithstanding). Tim points a cautionary finger at the blunders we could make from here, and does not minimize them. But on balance, he’s optimistic. I’ll add that his personal story is a nice case study for non-STEM folks, because Tim—like the founders of Ars Technica itself—dedicated his higher education to studying dead languages (specifically, Latin and Greek). As one who also prepared for his tech career by studying a non-programming language (in my case, Arabic), I approve.

Tim foresees smooth sailing if society can better provide for those being left behind. In this, he cites the bogeymen of all tech optimists, the Luddites. But he suffuses his discussion of them with both empathy and optimism. Not the blind optimism of the naïve. Not the self-serving optimism of the wealthy libertarian. But the fact-based optimism of a thoughtful technologist who is, at bottom, a realist.

I’ll close with a passage about the Luddites from Tim’s book. I also cited these words in our interview, because it find them so lyrical, and so characteristic of Tim’s perspective:

They were right to be afraid. The decades ahead were grim. Machines did replace human labor, and it took time for society to adjust.

But those weavers couldn’t imagine that their descendants would have more clothing than the kings and queens of Europe, that ordinary people would eat the fruits of summer in the depths of winter. They couldn’t imagine that we’d tunnel through mountains and under the sea, that we’d fly through the air, crossing continents in hours, that we’d build cities in the desert with buildings a half mile high, that we’d stand on the moon and put spacecraft in orbit around distant planets, that we would eliminate so many scourges of disease. And they couldn’t imagine that their children would find meaningful work bringing all of these things to life.

Rob Reid (@Rob_Reid on Twitter) founded the company that built the Rhapsody music service, and now writes science fiction for Random House/Del Rey. His new novel and his podcast are both called “After On.”

from Ars Technica http://ift.tt/2grRoBs
via IFTTT

‘Clinically Proven’ Does NOT Mean What YOU Think it Means [Video]

‘Clinically Proven’ Does NOT Mean What YOU Think it Means [Video]

VIDEO

You’ve seen it on your shampoo bottle, vitamins, and even your fancy moisturizing cream. But what does the phrase ‘clinically proven’ actually mean? Watch this episode of SciShow to find out!

[SciShow]

The phrase “Clinically Proven” means almost nothing, that’s a fact… it’s been clinically proven.


Advertisement


October 9, 2017 Geeks are Sexy General

0 Comments

from [Geeks Are Sexy] Technology News http://ift.tt/2y6onCV
via IFTTT

How Smartphones Hijack Our Minds

So you bought that new iPhone. If you are like the typical owner, you’ll be pulling your phone out and using it some 80 times a day, according to data Apple collects. That means you’ll be consulting the glossy little rectangle nearly 30,000 times over the coming year. Your new phone, like your old one, will become your constant companion and trusty factotum—your teacher, secretary, confessor, guru. The two of you will be inseparable.

The smartphone is unique in the annals of personal technology. We keep the gadget within…

from WSJ.com: What’s News US http://ift.tt/2fTZLFg
via IFTTT

How Monopoly Man Won The Internet

As former Equifax CEO Richard Smith prepares to testify before the Senate Banking Committee on Capitol Hill Wednesday, activist Amanda Werner looks on through a monocle.

Mark Wilson/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

As former Equifax CEO Richard Smith prepares to testify before the Senate Banking Committee on Capitol Hill Wednesday, activist Amanda Werner looks on through a monocle.

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Monopoly Man became the Internet crush of the day on Wednesday, after upstaging former Equifax CEO Richard Smith at a Senate hearing on the company’s massive data breach.

The board game character, whose name is Rich Uncle Pennybags, was brought to life by Amanda Werner, an arbitration campaign manager for Public Citizen and Americans for Financial Reform, groups that advocate for consumer rights and protections.

Almost immediately, the monocle, mustache, top hat, pillow case-sized bag of (#fake) Benjamins became a social media sensation.

The most unlikely viewers tuned in to the Senate Banking Committee hearing to watch Werner troll Smith, who was facing a roomful of angry senators after a hack that may have exposed the personal information of more than 145 million people.

People loved it.

“It was a very calculated move,” said Werner, who prefers the pronouns “they” and “them,” adding that it was hilarious to watch the scene become a meme in real time.

Werner mugged and preened for the camera and somehow, in a week dominated by sad and distressing news, gave people what they didn’t know they wanted: a delightful reprieve.

Here’s how Werner staged the viral protest — without getting kicked thrown out of the Capitol.

An alarm and an intern

Werner has attended a slew of Senate hearings and has even provided pro-consumer rights testimony in some cases. That is how the activist knew that getting on TV is all about location, and staying within the camera’s frame.

The problem is that seats in the audience tend to fill up quickly, Werner explained.

“Luckily we have a very dedicated intern here,” Werner said. “He showed up at 7 a.m. and held a spot in line for me so that we could get that prime seat.” The one directly behind Smith, who was the target of the grilling.

Apparently, the intern was the first person in line.

During the hearing, Werner followed #MonopolyMan‘s rise to stardom in real time on a phone. Over Twitter Werner was able to figure out the best angles as their head floated in and out of the camera’s view — at one point Werner peered over Smith’s shoulder using the monocle to inspect the back of the millionaire’s head; at another point they knowingly stroked the perfectly shaped mustache glued to their face.

Honed tone

Werner set out to garner as much publicity as possible for the type of advocacy work Public Citizen does on behalf of consumers.

“We wanted to do something to get people’s attention,” Werner said of the hours-long photobomb, adding that people’s eyes tend to glaze over when anyone utters the words “forced arbitration.”

Knowing that is the catalyst for coming up with creative protest ideas, Werner explained.

They added that given the somber tone of news coverage around the deadly shooting in Las Vegas this week, the goal was to inject a little humor into public discourse.

“I think this week has been a particularly rough week on the American psyche so I think people needed a little bit of levity,” Werner said.

It certainly inspired tens of thousands of happy face crying emoji’s on Twitter and on Facebook.

The decision to go the funny-route is in stark contrast the health care protests on Sept. 25 during a hearing on the most recent Republican plan to replace the Affordable Care Act. Demonstrators began chanting, delaying the start of the hearing. Fifteen people were arrested and charged with “Disruption of Congress,” according to U.S. Capitol Police. Dozens, staging die-ins in the hallway, were arrested and charged with “crowding, obstructing or incommoding.”

“There are a lot of different methods of protest and they all work for different instances,” Werner said. “You have to decide which is the best for your particular situation.”

Ultimately, Werner argued, a good protest leads to action. The notoriety is great to call attention to the cause, they said. But Werner added, “I hope that the effort [Wednesday] will make people not only laugh at the Monopoly Man and retweet these funny pictures but also to call their senators and tell them to vote no on SJ Res 47.”

The bill would overturn a new rule intended to ban financial service providers, including banks and credit card companies, from using mandatory arbitration clauses to resolve their disputes and avoid class action lawsuits.

Fashion statement, not statement statement

There are certain lines that members of the audience at committee hearings cannot cross. They do not appear to be listed on the Capitol Police website, but here are a few guidelines that Werner has collected.

Wearing a costume? That’s allowed.

Werner was a little concerned that the Capitol Police would not allow the top hat, but they didn’t give it a second look.

In fact, Werner recalls hearing a story about another demonstrator who dressed as Abraham Lincoln, complete with the beard and requisite foot-long stove pipe hat, and legend has it he was also allowed to wear throughout the proceedings.

Holding up a sign? That is against the rules and can get people thrown out.

Werner knew that going in, but that didn’t stop them from briefly holding up a yellow “Get out of jail free” card that appeared on screen a few times. “I didn’t hold it up long,” Werner confessed.

“I was a little afraid that as I was wiping my forehead with the $100 bill or doing other things that were calling a lot of attention to myself, that I might get warned,” they said.

But the only warning Werner received was for holding a giant bag of money on their lap, which they immediately set on the floor.

Another word-of-mouth tip Werner has received: Writing messages on one’s clothing is permitted.

from NPR Topics: News http://ift.tt/2fYFtxQ
via IFTTT

Secret Service Says ‘No System For Keeping Track’ Of Mar-A-Lago Visitors

Watchdogs are suing for logs of presidential visitors to President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fla.

Joe Raedle/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Watchdogs are suing for logs of presidential visitors to President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fla.

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Mar-a-Lago, President Trump’s private club and winter White House in Palm Beach, Fla., is a casual place. And so, it seems, are any official records of those who visits him there.

There “is no system for keeping track of presidential visitors at Mar-a-Lago, as there is at the White House complex,” Special Agent Kim Campbell said in a legal filing. She said the Secret Service conducted a lengthy search, only to find “there is no grouping, listing, or set of records that would reflect presidential visitors at Mar-a-Lago.”

That’s hard to believe, said Noah Bookbinder, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a group suing for the records.

Minus any records of presidential visitors, Bookbinder said, “it suggests Mar-a-Lago members and their guests could have access without any sort of vetting or accountability.”

The club doubled its membership initiation fee this year to $200,000.

Campbell said the latest search turned up a “few scattered pieces of Mar-a-Lago presidential visitor information found in paper or electronic documents.”

Government lawyers filed her statement Wednesday in response to a Freedom of Information lawsuit, filed by CREW, the National Security Archive and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

The lawsuit so far has produced just 22 names — Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s traveling party on his official visit in February.

Then-President Barack Obama began routinely releasing White House visitor logs in 2009, after CREW sued. Obama set exceptions for national security or a “necessarily confidential nature,” like meeting with nominees.

Trump stopped the White House disclosures. Administration lawyers argue that records on presidential visitors should be broadly exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

In the Mar-a-Lago case, Bookbinder said, “It appears they’re saying they found stuff but these things are not covered by FOIA.”

CREW and the other plaintiffs plan to file their response in a few days.

from NPR Topics: News http://ift.tt/2xXW1Nz
via IFTTT