The Scan Scam 4 August 2010
Posted by Lao Tzu in computers, law, politics, science, sociology, systems engineering, technology.Tags: airport scanners
add a comment
Backscatter Xray Image from Airport Scanner, from MSN
When new scanners that could see through clothing were proposed for security screening at airports, the TSA stated that the devices could not save / store images. It was then quickly discovered that these devices could store images (not surprising), but the TSA claimed that it was only for training purposes and that they devices would not have that capability in operations. Today, marshalls reported that these devices are being used to store images, and one such device has stored thousands of images.
So what this means is that the Government has implemented a device that violates your privacy by taking images through your clothing, and the device has the capability for users to store and distribute the image, and we were lied to about that capability.
What is Technological Progress 14 July 2010
Posted by Lao Tzu in advertising, anthropology, business, false adertising, science, sociology, technology.Tags: blackberry, comcast, comcast digital voice, droid, gillete
add a comment
So I have been meaning to write a post for a while on the meaning of technological progress. Then today I saw an article that was slightly related regarding the never-ending development of mens’ facial razors. My concern lately has been more on telephones and televisions. So let’s elaborate. What is the definition of technological progress? How do you know you have advanced?
The article on razor’s points out that there are new designs with a lot of hype and increased cost, but are they really better? I, for one data point, can attest that I have the latest model razor from Gillete, complete with a battery in the handle and a vibrating head, and I still get nicks. I shave my head at night to give time for my nicks to heal before showering again in the morning. So, after several high tech designs with corresponding increase in cost, there is no real advancement in the core required capability.
Cell phones are another easy example. I have the latest cell phone technology, a Motorola Droid. And, much like my previous BlackBerry device, it is a great, multi-function, all-in-one, personal digital assistant, However, it is a crappy phone. The speakers are always designed to be small, as if they do not know that the bigger the speaker – the louder. Reception has not really improved – only coverage. I still get a lot of dropped calls – a phenomenon where the Apple iPhone is an even better example. I do not expect a cell phone to sound as good as a land line, but land lines are getting worse. I remember talking on a telephone in the 1970s, and I never had a problem with hearing someone, or had static or other background noise. Now, my landline, decades later, with Comcast digital voice, sounds terrible – very quiet, static, and plenty of background noise. It is essentially useless. And they advertise digital voice as sounding better than an analog phone. Whenever I hear a marketeer wield the word digital, it reminds me of the word electrolytes in the movie Idiocrasy.
So, if we ignore the hype, the additional features, and focus on the core required functionality, I think we would see very little progress in several technologies, but not all.
But let’s expand this even further to not just technological progress, but social progress. For example, if new technology costs more, is it really progress at all?
Researching the Obvious 26 April 2010
Posted by Lao Tzu in biology, medicine, science, Uncategorized.Tags: unhealthy behaviors
1 comment so far
So there is an apparent trend that I have noticed the last 5 years or so of a growing increase into research of the obvious. Articles are being published in respectable journals detailing the findings of funded research projects that not only seem unnecessary to account, but unnecessary to investigate in the first place. Or course, I am a fan of the scientific method and believe that few things should be taken for granted, but those few seem to be the subject of research efforts lately, probably because it is very easy to get funding. Maybe these projects are convenient gap fillers for small research organizations. Maybe the quest for continual funding has elicited some institutions to go after the low hanging fruit, or projects that might generate large media hype.
The latest example can be found here. This project “discovered” that the following habits correlate with premature death:
- Smoking
- Lack of exercise
- Poor diet
- Substantial alcohol consumption
Not only have these facts been know for centuries, and are taught in elementary school, but I think they qualify as common sense in accordance with most definitions (if there is such a thing). In other words, I would have to believe that a reasonable person would expect this without a scientific investigation.
So, what is the nature or cause behind such meager research projects? Did the medical community not accept these factors before this study provided “proof”? And why is this news?
Salon 1 