SI
SI
discoversearch

 Technology Stocks | The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40756)3/31/2012 12:26:26 AM
From: LindyBill
   of 44343
 
Chinese Workers Are Upset With Less Overtime: "We're Here to Work and Not to Play"
by Mark J. Perry
Reuters - "When Chinese worker Wu Jun heard that her employer, the giant electronics assembly company Foxconn, had given employees landmark concessions her reaction was worry, not elation.



Foxconn's concessions, including cutting overtime for its1.2 million mainland Chinese workers while promisingcompensation that protects them against losing income, werebacked by Apple, which has faced criticism and media scrutinyfor worker safety lapses and for using relatively low-paidemployees to make high-cost phones, computers and other gadgets.


But at the Foxconn factory gates, many workers seemedunconvinced that their pay wouldn't be cut along with theirhours. For some Chinese factory workers - who make much of theirincome from long hours of overtime - the idea of less work forthe same pay could take getting used to.



"We are worried we will have less money to spend. Of course,if we work less overtime, it would mean less money," said Wu, a23-year-old employee from Hunan province in south China.


"We are here to work and not to play, so our income is veryimportant," said Chen Yamei, 25, a Foxconn worker from Hunan whosaid she had worked at the factory for four years.


"We have just been told that we can only work a maximum of36 hours a month of overtime. I tell you, a lot of us areunhappy with this. We think that 60 hours of overtime a monthwould be reasonable and that 36 hours would be too little," sheadded. Chen said she now earned a bit over 4,000 yuan a month($634).

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: LindyBill3/31/2012 5:39:02 AM
   of 44343
 
Warned of an Attack on the Internet, and Getting Ready
By SOMINI SENGUPTA
NEW YORK TIMES

SAN FRANCISCO — On a quiet Sunday in mid-February, something curious attracted the attention of the behind-the-scenes engineers who scour the Internet for signs of trouble. There, among the ubiquitous boasts posted by the hacking collective Anonymous, was a call to attack some of the network's most crucial parts.

The message called it Operation Global Blackout, and rallied Anonymous supporters worldwide to attack the Domain Name System, which converts human-friendly domain names like google.com into numeric addresses that are more useful for computers.

It declared when the attack would be carried out: March 31. And it detailed exactly how: by bombarding the Domain Name System with junk traffic in an effort to overwhelm it altogether.

There was no way to know for sure whether this was a pre-April Fool's Day hoax or a credible threat. After all, this was Anonymous, a decentralized movement with no leaders and no coherent ideology, but a track record of considerable damage. The call to arms would have to be treated as one would treat a bomb threat called in to a high school football game. The engineers would have to prepare.

Those preparations turned into a fast-track, multimillion-dollar global effort to beef up the Domain Name System. They offer a glimpse into the largely unknown forces that keep the Internet running in the face of unpredictable, potentially devastating threats.

Among those leading the effort was Bill Woodcock, whose nonprofit based in San Francisco, Packet Clearing House, defends vital pieces of Internet infrastructure. By his calculation, the Anonymous threat was as good a reason as any to accelerate what might have been done anyway over the next several months: fortify the network, chiefly by expanding the capacity of the root servers that are its main pillar.

"Whether or not Anonymous carries out this particular attack, there are larger attacks that do happen," Mr. Woodcock said. "A forewarning of this attack allowed everyone to act proactively for a change. We can get out in front of the bigger attacks."

In an attack, the hackers would in effect point virtual cannons at the name servers and blast them with data in what is called a distributed denial of service attack, or DDoS. The only effective way to mitigate such an attack is to expand capacity — so much so that the system can absorb the extra traffic thrown at it, while still accommodating the normal load.

"DDoS is very much a numbers game," Mr. Woodcock said. "If the target has more than the sum of the attackers' capability and normal day-to-day traffic, then it is fine."

In the last few weeks, in a campaign financed mostly by companies that maintain Internet infrastructure, several huge 40-gigabit routers and hundreds of servers have been shipped across the world and hooked into the network, giving the Domain Name System additional computing power. It was part of what is often called an arms race between attackers and defenders on the Internet.

On Saturday, if an attack takes place, it is likely to be imperceptible, at least initially, to the bulk of the world's Internet users, though service could slow down in places that have narrow bandwidth to begin with — much of sub-Saharan Africa, for instance. In the improbable event of a huge attack that goes unabated for several days, the ability to connect to Web sites could be impaired.

But if the defenses are effective, the result will be something akin to what happened with the Y2K bug: advance warning, plenty of preparation and then barely a blip on the Internet.

Still, it will be anything but a normal Saturday for the people who run the Domain Name System. They plan to be glued to their monitors, looking out for signs of unusual network traffic, communicating with one other through encrypted, digitally signed e-mails or through a private telephone hot line maintained just for this purpose.

"For us, it's not going to be another day at the office," said Paul Vixie, whose nonprofit Internet Systems Consortium in Redwood City, Calif., runs a root server known as the F-root. "We are going to be on alert."

There are 13 root servers worldwide, run by government institutions, universities and private companies. The operators of several of them declined to talk about the threat, including VeriSign, which runs two root servers. Some insisted that they routinely expand capacity to guard against attacks that come from different quarters all the time.

Mr. Vixie, for his part, warned against what he called "panic engineering" in the face of any particular threat. "We are using the threatened attack," he said, "to go kick the tires on everything, make sure there's no loose dangly parts."

Part of the challenge here is the mercurial and leaderless nature of the Anonymous movement. Just after one so-called Anonymous member called for the attack to protest, among other things, "our irresponsible leaders and the beloved bankers who are starving the world for their own selfish needs out of sheer sadistic fun," another unnamed member of the movement pushed back. "I don't think this is a good idea," this person wrote on an Anonymous-affiliated site. "The collateral damage is not worth it."

A pragmatist wondered how participants would know when to end the attack, if indeed the Domain Name System was overwhelmed. Another suggested that they attack only "the 10 most used sites." Yet another reckoned that root servers would be so heavily protected that an Anonymous attack could only disrupt them for "a few minutes."

Since late February, there has been little to no chatter about Operation Global Blackout on Twitter, which Anonymous often uses to spread the word about its campaigns.

Even so, computer security professionals point out, anyone can act in the name of Anonymous, and Anonymous has certainly swung its wrecking ball around in the last few years: its denial of service attacks have impaired private sites like that of PayPal, and some of its offshoots have penetrated the e-mail communications of global law enforcement agencies.

Dan Kaminsky, a security researcher who pointed out the inherent vulnerabilities of the Domain Name System several years ago, put the probability of an effective attack this way: as unlikely as a shark descending from the sky, jaws open.

Nevertheless, on the Internet, no warning should go unheeded, he said: "It is belt-and-suspenders stuff: Is everything where it should be? You have to be ready for disaster."
"

nytimes.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40743)3/31/2012 7:18:43 PM
From: fred g
   of 44343
 
Frank, much as I hate to agree with LindyBill :-), there seems to be no there there. Maybe he's doing a Peltier Effect Device in reverse, but when he talks about "nanofluids", it sounds like a scam aimed at fleecing investors. I've seen it many times before.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: ftth3/31/2012 11:36:40 PM
   of 44343
 
“Iceland happens to be a rare spot on the earth where there is a convergence of attributes that tick all the boxes,” says Jeff Monroe, chief executive officer of Verne Global, Björgólfsson’s venture. “You have 100 percent renewable energy. We can do 100 percent free cooling.”

Interesting article: Iceland, Data-Center Hub?

businessweek.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: LindyBill4/1/2012 6:48:32 AM
   of 44343
 
This is really scary.

The Human Voice, as Game Changer
By NATASHA SINGER
NEW YORK TIMES
Burlington, Mass.

VLAD SEJNOHA is talking to the TV again.

O.K., maybe you've done that, too. But here's the weird thing: His TV is listening.

"Dragon TV," Mr. Sejnoha says to the screen, "find movies with Meryl Streep." Up pops a list of films like "Out of Africa" and "It's Complicated."

"Dragon TV, change to CNN," he says. Presto — the channel flips to CNN.

Mr. Sejnoha is sitting in what looks like a living room but is, in fact, a sort of laboratory inside Nuance Communications, the leading force in voice technology, and the speech-recognition engine behind Siri, the virtual personal assistant on the Apple iPhone 4S.

Here, Mr. Sejnoha, the company's chief technology officer, and other executives are plotting a voice-enabled future where human speech brings responses from not only smartphones and televisions, cars and computers, but also coffee makers, refrigerators, thermostats, alarm systems and other smart devices and appliances.

It is a wildly disruptive idea. But such systems are already beginning to change the way we interact with the world and, for better and worse, how we think about technology. Until now, after all, we've talked only to one another. What if we begin talking to all sorts of machines, too — and, like Siri, those machines respond as if they were human?

Granted, people have been talking into machines and at machines since the days of Edison's phonograph. By the 1980s, commercial speech recognition systems had become sophisticated enough to transcribe spoken words into text. Today, voice technology is a fixture of many companies' customer-service operations, albeit an occasionally maddening one.

But now the race is on to make the voice the sought-after new interface between us and our technology. The results could rival innovations like the computer mouse and the graphic icon and, some experts say, eventually pose challenges for giants like Google by bypassing their traditional search engines.

No player is bigger in voice technology than Nuance, of Burlington, Mass., an industry pioneer that has acquired more than 40 companies in the field and today employs 7,300 people. It is one of the companies that helped make a big technological leap from programs that take dictation to systems that actually extract meaning from words and respond to them. Now it wants to push far beyond that.

"They are the equivalent of Microsoft, Google or Amazon in a very niche technological space," says Andrew Rosenberg, an assistant professor of computer science at Queens College.

Like many new technologies, sophisticated voice systems have potential drawbacks. Some experts worry about privacy invasions, others about our ever-deepening attachment to devices like smartphones.

Humans are wired for speech and tend to respond to talking devices as if they were kindred spirits, says Sherry Turkle, a professor of the social studies of science and technology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"I'm not saying voice recognition is bad," Professor Turkle says. "I'm saying it's part of a package of attachments to objects where we should tread carefully because we are pushing a lot of Darwinian buttons in our psychology."

ONLY a decade ago, voice-enabled virtual assistants seemed more science fiction than business fact. But in 2000, Paul Ricci, a former executive at Xerox, concluded that voice software could one day disrupt the marketplace the way the mouse and the icon had in the 1980s.

"We had to decide early on where there were markets where we could successfully deploy the technology," says Mr. Ricci, Nuance's chief executive.

Nuance, then known as ScanSoft, went on an aggressive acquisition spree. It bought a desktop dictation system called Dragon NaturallySpeaking, as well as dozens of small companies that had carved niches in medical dictation, automated voice-response systems and speech research. Its most significant acquisition was Nuance, a rival that had been spun off from S.R.I. International of Menlo Park, Calif. The combined company took the Nuance name. (S.R.I. International later developed and spun off Siri, which was acquired by Apple in 2010.)

"They have literally tried to buy every good asset out there, or build it themselves, knit it all together and augment it," Richard Davis, an analyst at Canaccord Genuity, says of Nuance.

Nuance reported revenue of about $1.3 billion for 2011, with $515 million of that coming from its health care technology business.

The stock market seems to like what it sees: Nuance's share price touched a record high of $31.15 on Feb. 9, about double a level of $15.59 last August; it closed on Friday at $25.58.

Not everyone is as enamored with voice technology. Some privacy advocates worry that it adds an audio track to the digital trail that people leave behind when they use the Web or apps, potentially exposing them to more data mining.

Voice recognition software works by sending speech to processors that break down spoken words into sound waves and use algorithms to identify the most likely words formed by the sounds. The system typically records and stores speech so it can teach itself to become more accurate over time. Nuance, for example, believes that, aside from the federal government, it has amassed the largest archive of recorded speech in the United States.

Nuance says it is impossible to identify consumers from the recordings, because the company's system recognizes people's voices only by unique codes on their devices, rather than by their names. The company's privacy policy says it uses the voice data of consumers only to improve its own internal systems.

"We have no idea who you are today," says Peter Mahoney, the company's chief marketing officer.

Such assurances aside, voice recognition software could conceivably pose enough of a risk to people's privacy that regulators in Washington are watching.

"Just as we are concerned about the possible applications of facial recognition, there are other forms of biometric identification, like voice, that pose the same kind of problems," says David C. Vladeck, the director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission. He was speaking about voice technology in general, not about Nuance in particular.

"DRAGON GO," Mr. Sejnoha says into his iPhone, "I want to make reservations for three tomorrow night at Craigie on Main."

Dragon Go is Nuance's own virtual assistant, an app that has been downloaded several million times since its introduction last summer.

Unlike Siri, however, Dragon Go doesn't talk back. Mr. Sejnoha was asking for a reservation at a restaurant in Cambridge, Mass., and the app went directly to OpenTable and displayed his reservation options.

Ask Dragon Go for tickets to, say, "The Hunger Games," and it typically displays a listing of showtimes at the nearest cinema from Fandango. A query about a particular spa might elicit reviews from Yelp.

Dragon Go, Nuance's first direct-to-consumer app, is part of a push to build the brand's visibility and demonstrate Nuance's technological advances to business customers. Its real goal is even bigger: to disrupt the role of search engines as gatekeepers to the Web.

For the most common queries, Dragon Go usually bypasses search engines by taking users directly to Web sites of companies like Amazon, Expedia and OpenTable, which are Nuance partners on the app. If people don't find what they're looking for there, Dragon Go offers traditional Web search.

The benefit for consumers, Nuance executives say, is faster answers in fewer steps. In many cases, Nuance collects a small fee from partner sites when people make restaurant reservations or complete purchases. The app could be construed as a challenge to the likes of Google and Microsoft, which have their own voice products — such as Google Voice Actions and Microsoft Tellme — as well as search engines.

"If you are Google," says Mr. Davis, the analyst, "you are saying, 'Holy smokes, we are about to get cut out of the equation.' "

Christopher Katsaros, a Google spokesman, declined to comment. The company has recently updated Google Voice Actions, its voice-command system for Android phones, with a feature that continuously converts people's speech to text, making it faster and smoother to dictate and send text messages, search Google aloud, or ask for directions.

Lezli Goheen, a spokeswoman for Microsoft, said that the company had addressed consumers' expectations for easier access to information through several means. In addition to Tellme, a program included in all new Windows products that lets people dictate text messages and commands to applications like calendars, she said, the company has introduced Bing Voice Search, a program that lets people speak their Bing searches.

Nuance, meanwhile, has similarly ambitious plans for its health care business. In collaboration with I.B.M., the company is developing analytics to scour the medical notes that doctors dictate after they see patients. The idea is to search the text for common red flags — like medicines that interact dangerously — and automatically alert doctors, hopefully reducing problems and health care costs.

MEMBERS of US Airways' frequent-flier program who have registered their mobile phone numbers are greeted by name by "Wally," an interactive voice system that Nuance created for the airline.

One day last month, Wally was talking to Kerry Hester, a senior vice president at US Airways, who had called to check on her own flight.

"Hello, Kerry, I've matched your mobile number to your Dividend mileage account," Wally said. Her flight from Phoenix to Los Angeles, Wally reported, unprompted, was "still scheduled to depart on time at 11:20 from Gate A23."

If Wally's voice sounds familiar, that's because it belongs to Wally Wingert, the announcer on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno," who prerecorded all the words that callers hear.

US Airways introduced Wally last summer, as part of a relocation of its offshore customer service call-in operations back to the United States. Nuance designed the system to anticipate callers' requests. Wally, for example, can automatically tell frequent-flier members their seat assignments or report whether they have received upgrades. It also converts people's speech to text, so that, should customers ask to speak a live operator, they don't have to repeat their original requests.

Wally, Ms. Hester says, has reduced the number of customers who ask to speak with agents, as well as the average length of customer calls. "Without the system, we would have had to hire a couple hundred more agents," she says.

Wally, which never lets on that it is an automated system, seems so personable that many people say "thank you" before hanging up, Ms. Hester says.

"I think that tells us that they were satisfied," she says. "I think it tells us that they felt they were interacting with a person."

But the lack of disclosure bothers Professor Turkle of M.I.T. As voice-enabled systems become more sophisticated, she says, they create the illusion that we are interacting with other people, rather than with machines. In the long term, she says, the systems' sleekness and ease of use could end up diminishing the value of slower, messier, real human connections. Reminding users that they are talking to a machine can make them more conscious of the superficiality of the exchange.

"We need to make a cultural decision," Professor Turkle says. "Either we want to alert people when they are talking to a machine, or we don't."

IN 2008, Nuance sued a fierce rival in the voice technology market, contending patent infringement. The company, Vlingo, which markets its own virtual-assistant apps for Android phones, BlackBerries and iPhones, countersued, making similar allegations.

Last year, a court found that Vlingo had not infringed. On several other lawsuits, including the Vlingo countersuit, the parties have agreed to stays. That is because, last December, Nuance agreed to buy Vlingo for an undisclosed sum. It plans to complete the acquisition in the first half of this year.

"From our standpoint, the ability to compete with Google, that owns half the smartphone market, and Microsoft, that bundles voice with their products, that's the real business logic behind merging with Nuance," says Dave Grannan, the chief executive of Vlingo, which is based in Cambridge, Mass.

Nuance and Vlingo share a vision of a world populated by cloud-based, voice-enabled virtual assistants that move seamlessly from one device to another.

One afternoon earlier this year, a team of Vlingo executives demonstrated their own TV voice-command system to a New York Times reporter. The executives also showed a short animated video in which a fictional couple merrily conversed with their smartphones, tablet computer, TV and car — and the devices replied in kind, alerting the male character that his car needed gas and the woman that her flight that day had been canceled because of bad weather.

"More proactively alerting you with voice, telling you something about your car or an accident ahead, a personal assistant thinking about your needs and keeping you connected to other people is where we think this technology is really going," Mr. Grannan says.

BACK in Nuance's mock living room, Mr. Sejnoha is finishing his demo of Dragon TV, the company's new software that can be built into Web-connected TVs. With it, viewers can use voice commands not only to find programs but also to make Skype calls or shop on Amazon via the TV. The technology is scheduled to hit the market shortly: LG Electronics plans to introduce a smart TV powered by Nuance software that lets viewers update Facebook and Twitter accounts by speaking into a special remote control.

Soon, Mr. Sejnoha predicts, many other devices, not just televisions, will be taking voiced commands, and talking back. In Germany, people can already ask a Nuance-powered coffee maker — marketed as "the first fully automatic machine that obeys" speech — to make cappuccino. The machine, called the Jura Impressa Z7 One Touch Voice, speaks both English and German.

Dragon TV, meanwhile, is already available in about two dozen languages.

"Dragon TV, mute," Mr. Sejnoha says.

Silence.

"See," he says, "it's useful."
"

nytimes.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40756)4/1/2012 7:05:48 AM
From: axial
   of 44343
 
Nothing unusual here. The press is doing what it always does - exposing the dirty underside of current affairs. The company - an acknowledged leader in tightly controlling every aspect of production - is pretending surprise at the revelations, and promising reforms. Here and elsewhere, the haves invoke economic hardship for others as a defense of their right to extract profit, as if it were a fundamental requirement of human existence. It's reminiscent of those who defend hazing - "My daddy had it tough, so you should too."

Hardly an enlightened perspective; even Henry Ford recognized the need for competitive wages, enabling workers to buy the company's product.

Meanwhile workers, like workers everywhere, try to better their lot.

We should note that Chinese consumers themselves have been equal to their western counterparts, queuing enthusiastically for the company's products. Their behavior does not reflect a moral quandary.

Not that employees can be saved, anyway; last year Foxconn announced plans to begin replacing workers with more than a million robots.

---

The defense is simple: vote with your wallet. If you object to a company's treatment of production workers, then don't buy its products.

Jim

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: LindyBill who wrote (40769)4/1/2012 12:58:28 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio
   of 44343
 
Hi Bill.

Thanks for saving me the time to post this article, while helping me at the same time conserve on the ten "free" viewings per month of the NYT sheet. I was once a happy paying subscriber, then they changed their mind and made the site "free", but now they've erected a pay wall again. I figured I'd wait to let equilibrium settle in before once again exposing myself to ID theft by making yet another credit card payment. Someone, please, let me know when it's soup.
--

Re: "We have no idea who you are, really."

Really? C'mon, you're kidding, right?

Re: "Some privacy advocates worry that it adds an audio track to the digital trail that people leave behind when they use the Web or apps, potentially exposing them to more data mining."

It's not too difficult to envisage the next app: taking the spoken word and converting it in near- real-time to another, synthesized voice, perhaps trans-gendered or neutered.

FAC

------

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40771)4/1/2012 1:20:54 PM
From: LindyBill
   of 44343
 
No need to pay the NYT. Simply open it at "Google News." Easiest way is simply to copy and paste the link at Google, then open

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: LindyBill who wrote (40772)4/1/2012 8:00:35 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio
   of 44343
 
Thanks for the tip, Bill.

Re: "No need to pay the NYT. Simply open it at "Google News." Easiest way is simply to copy and paste the link at Google, then open."

Of course, alternatively, I can simply wait to see what filters through to this forum, so as to further remove myself personally from any feelings I've violated anyone's acceptable use policy :)

------

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40773)4/1/2012 8:42:33 PM
From: LindyBill
   of 44343
 
I've violated anyone's acceptable use policy :)

They make it available to Google, so they know it can be reached there. Your conduct is therefore ethical. I use the "liguid information" program, which is the best attachment out there for Firefox. Simply add Google news to their search function, then highlight and open the resultant link.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.