Rightways

Friday, May 7, 2010

This Day In Tech Events That Shaped the Wired World May 7, 1952: The Integrated Circuit … What a Concept!

1952: British radar engineer Geoffrey Dummer introduces the concept of the integrated circuit at a tech conference in the United States. The world is about to change.

At the heart of every electronic device today — from computers to aircraft navigation systems — is a little circuit that has changed computing and ushered in the digital era, much as the steam engine helped usher in the Industrial Revolution.

The integrated circuit brings together components with different functions and puts them in a compact miniature board. The credit for the first working example eventually went to Texas Instruments engineer Jack Kilby. But Kilby was building on work done before him.

Dummer, who worked for his country’s defense ministry, first published the idea of an integrated circuit at the 1952 Symposium on Progress in Quality Electronic Components in Washington, D.C.

“With the advent of the transistor and the work in semiconductors generally, it seems now possible to envisage electronic equipment in a solid block with no connecting wires,” he told the audience at the conference, according to the Electronic Product News. ”The block may consist of layers of insulating, conducting, rectifying and amplifying materials, the electronic functions being connected directly by cutting out areas of the various layers.”

Dummer tried unsuccessfully for the next few years to build such a circuit, until the British Government turned off the funding for his project.

By then, work on the idea of the IC had moved to the United States. The challenge with creating a practical IC was that all the components in the circuit had to have no faults. Also, there couldn’t be too many wires in the interconnects for a complex circuit, or else the circuit would be slow.

Kilby found a solution in the summer of 1958. His idea was to make all the components and the chip out of the same block of semiconductor material, and layer the metal needed to connect them on top of it.

The first integrated circuit was fairly crude — it had only a transistor and other components on a slice of germanium. But it did show the potential of the IC, which continues today to get smaller and more complex.
Just a few months later, Robert Noyce, one of the co-founders of Fairchild Semiconductor and Intel, solved some of the problems related to the interconnects, sharing the credit with Kilby for the practical IC.

Kilby patented the invention and won the 2000 Nobel Prize in Physics for his role in the creation of the IC.

Dummer died in February 2002 at the age of 93.

Photo: First integrated circuit by Jack Kilby at Texas Instruments in 1958.
Courtesy Texas Instruments

By Priya Ganapati

Source: Newscribe : get free news in real time

See Also:

5 Things Apple Must Do to Look Less Evil

It’s appropriate that the Apple logo on the iPad is black. The Cupertino, California, company’s image is taking on some awfully sinister tones lately.

For a company that made its name fighting for the little guy, it’s a surprising reversal. In the past, Apple touted itself as the computer company for nonconformists who “Think Different.” Now the company is making moves that make it look like the Big Brother it once mocked.

First Apple tightened its iron grip on the already-stringent iPhone developer policy, requiring apps to be made with Apple-approved languages, which disturbed some coders and even children. A short while later, Apple rejected some high-profile apps based on their editorial content, raising journalists’ questions about press freedoms in the App Store. Then, police kicked down a Gizmodo editor’s door to investigate a lost iPhone prototype that Apple had reported as stolen. Even Ellen DeGeneres and Jon Stewart have mocked Apple’s heavy-handed moves.

Plenty of us love our shiny iPads, iPods, iPhones and MacBooks — state-of-the-art gadgets with undeniable allure. But it’s tough to imagine customers will stay loyal to a company whose image and actions are increasingly nefarious. We want to like the corporation we give money to, don’t we?

Here are five things Apple should do to redeem its fast-fading public image.

Publish App Store Rules

As I’ve argued before, the App Store’s biggest problem is not that there are rules, but that app creators don’t know what the rules are. As a result, people eager to participate in the App Store censor themselves, and that hurts innovation and encourages conformity. The least Apple can do is publish a list of guidelines about what types of content are allowed in the App Store. After all, Apple has had nearly two years and almost 200,000 apps to figure out what it wants in the App Store. Tell people what the rules are so they know what they’re getting into, and so they can innovate as much as possible. That would also tell us customers what we’re not getting on our iPhone OS devices.

Formalize Relationships With Publishers

Publishers are hypnotized by imaginary dollar signs when they look at the iPad as a platform that could reinvent publishing and reverse declining revenues. But after recent editorial-related app rejections, journalists are slowly waking up to our forewarning that Apple could control the press because news and magazine apps on the iPad are at the mercy of the notoriously temperamental App Store reviewers. If Apple wants to look a little less like the Chinese government, it should work with publishers to ink formal agreements regarding content to guarantee editorial freedom to respected brands.

Tweak iPhone Developer Agreement

Apple’s stated purpose of its revised iPhone developer policy is to block out meta platforms to ensure a high level of quality in the App Store. Also, from a business perspective, there is no lock-in advantage if you can get the same apps on the iPhone as you can on other competing smartphones. Fair enough, but Apple would be silly to think it can keep the mobile market all to itself, and its developer agreement comes off as a piece of literature holding developers hostage.

It’s hard to create new rules, but it’s easy to abolish existing ones. Apple should loosen up its iPhone developer agreement by snipping out a part of section 7.2, which states that any applications developed using Apple’s SDK may only be publicly distributed through the App Store. That implies that if you originally create an app with the Apple SDK, you’re not allowed to even modify it with different languages and sell it through another app store like Google’s Android market. In other words, iPhone apps belong to Apple. This rule is basically unenforceable to begin with, and Apple should just remove it, along with other similar policies.

Apologize to Jason Chen

Reasonable people can disagree over whether it was ethical for Gizmodo to purchase the lost iPhone prototype, but the police action — kicking down Jason Chen’s door to seize his computers — was overboard. It was self-evidently a clumsy move: After damaging Chen’s property, the police paused the investigation to study whether the journalists’ Shield Law protected Chen. The proper action would have been to issue a subpoena to get Chen to talk about the device first. Apple, which instigated the police action by filing a stolen property complaint, should publicly apologize to Chen (no relation to the author of this post) and reimburse him for the damages.

Get Gray Powell on Stage

When Apple accidentally leaked its PowerMac G5 a couple of years ago, Apple’s legal team forced MacRumors’ Arnold Kim to pull down his post containing the information. But a humbled Steve Jobs joked about the slip during his WWDC 2003 keynote, calling it a case of “Premature specification.” (See the video below.)

He should do a similar thing when he officially unveils Apple’s next phone, by having Gray Powell — the engineer who misplaced the next-generation iPhone prototype — make a stage appearance. Powell could walk out and hand Jobs the phone, saying “Hey Steve, I found your lost phone,” or something similar. Some comedic relief, provided by the engineer who lost the iPhone prototype in a bar, can remind us that Apple is still a company guided by a man with a sense of humor.

By Brian X. Chen
Source: Newscribe : get free news in real time

See Also:

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Stephen Hawking predicts possibility of time travel

Professor Stephen Hawking has suggested humans might one day be able to construct spaceships capable of such speeds that time on board would slow down. Such a craft could travel thousands of years into the future, reaching distant star systems within the lifetime of its crew.

“Time travel was once considered scientific heresy and I used to avoid talking about it for fear of being labelled a crank, but these days I’m not so cautious,” Hawking says in his ongoing series being broadcast on the Discovery channel.

He suggests humanity could build a giant “relativistic” spaceship, so called because it would exploit the science set out by Albert Einstein in his theories of relativity.

Einstein found that as objects accelerate through space, the rate at which time passes for them slows down. For objects such as cars and aircraft the effect is negligible, but Hawking’s spaceship would exceed 98 percent of the speed of light, when such effects would be extremely powerful.

Hawking said such a ship could theoretically reach speeds of more than 1,000 million km/h, but would have to be built on a huge scale simply to carry all the necessary fuel.

“It would take six years at full power just to reach these speeds. After the first two years it would reach half light speed and be far outside the solar system. After another two years it would be travelling at 90 percent of the speed of light,” he said.

Source:Xinhua/Agencies
“After another two years of full thrust the ship would reach full speed, 98 percent of the speed of light, and each day on the ship would be a year on Earth. At such speeds a trip to the edge of the galaxy would take just 80 years for those on board.”

However, Hawking dismisses the prospect of time travel into the past. Some scientists have suggested this could be done by exploiting wormholes, gateways linking different parts of the universe or which provide a short-cut backwards or forwards through time. Theory suggests such wormholes do exist at the quantum scale, meaning they are far smaller even than atoms, so the challenge would be to enlarge them to a human scale.

But Hawking dismisses the idea, pointing out that time travel into the past would create the “mad scientist paradox” where a researcher could travel back in time and shoot his past self, raising the question of who could have fired the shot.

“This kind of time machine would violate a fundamental rule that cause comes before effect,” said Hawking. “I believe things cannot make themselves impossible. So it won’t be possible to travel back to the past, using

wormholes or any other method.”

Source: Newscribe : get free news in real time

People's Daily Online

Do you have anything to say?

Yahoo stabs at Google in new ad

Yahoo has always seemed like such a nice place. The sort of place where, if you happened upon it by chance, the inhabitants would sit you down, give you a cup of tea and a cookie, and ask you what brought you to its parts. They'd even ask you how to pronounce your name.

So how odd and strangely refreshing to see Yahoo roll up a little ball of competitive spit and blow it in the direction of Google.

In a new ad, Yahoo suggests that Google has got it all wrong. Home pages aren't for being dull and lifeless. They aren't for sending people on their way as quickly as possible. They're for being your all purpose online bedside table. You know, the one where you keep your after-shave, your eyebrow pencil, your deodorant, several books, your nasal hair remover, your BlackBerry (office issue), your iPhone (personal use) and your various medicines and loose change.

Naturally, I paraphrase. For the tagline of this new spot is "Your favorite stuff all in one place. Make Yahoo your home page."

Yahoo! Tile Video @ Yahoo! Video

What a thoughtful strategy this is, albeit one that is being pursued by Facebook with all the straightforwardness and vigor of a direct mail lawyer.

Perhaps the highlight of this piece is the part when a home page that looks mightily like that of Google (sans the Google logo) is accompanied by the words: "When you look at this home page nothing looks back at you. You come to this place so you can leave."

Yahoo contrasts this with its own approach. It claims Yahoo "doesn't hustle you out the door. It's a place that gets to know you, a place that finds things for you." How true. There are so many for whom the clean, simple, welcoming design of Yahoo is the home for news of sports, finance and other vital things.

"Yahoo's mission now is to convince consumers that Yahoo is the place where you go to navigate the entire Web," Jeff Goodby, the co-founder of the ad agency responsible for this piece, told the Wall Street Journal.
This is a worthy quest. But one only wishes it could be presented in a manner that was just slightly less redolent of a large cup of chamomile.

Watching little Scrabble tiles with logos on them waft across the screen merely suggests a small wardrobe change for some of these poor logos after their shoot for a Windows Mobile campaign of late last year.
I know there will be some who might wish that if the idea was to present a serious contrast between Yahoo and Google, there might have been a slightly greater attempt to create a little more, well, drama. As it is, this may feel like little more than a small child tweaking its great uncle's bottom.

By Chris Matyszczyk is an award-winning creative director who advises major corporations on content creation and marketing. He brings an irreverent, sarcastic, and sometimes ironic voice to the tech world. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.

Source: Newscribe : get free news in real time

Can Exercise Prevent Disability?

PhysOrg.com) -- A new study will test if exercise can prevent or delay the declining ability to walk in older adults.

Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine will be the Chicago site of a national trial funded by the National Institutes of Health. It is the largest randomized, controlled trial ever conducted on physical activity in older adults.

"The results will provide definitive evidence, for the first time, about whether exercise can prevent decline in walking ability in an older, frail population," said lead investigator Mary McDermott, M.D., professor of medicine at Feinberg and a physician at Northwestern Memorial Hospital. "The study is of utmost importance given the aging of the population and the fact that older men and women are living longer with chronic disease. Maintaining independence is one of our public health priorities for older adults."

Little is known about whether specific interventions can help prevent major mobility disability, defined as the inability to walk a quarter of a mile or four blocks. For older adults, staving off disability could help them maintain their physical independence and enhance the quality of their later years.

Called the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders, or LIFE study, the national trial will enroll 1,600 sedentary older adults between the ages of 70 and 89 who are at risk of mobility disability. Northwestern, one of eight institutions around the country conducting the trial, will enroll 200.

The LIFE study will compare the long-term effectiveness and practicality of two interventions: a physical activity program and a successful aging health education program.

Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to take part in either a structured physical activity program that includes moderate-intensity physical activity such as walking and exercises to improve strength, balance and flexibility, or in a successful aging program that includes health education workshops and supervised stretching. Individuals will be followed for up to approximately four years. The overall trial will run for six years.

In addition to disability prevention, investigators will examine whether physical activity and health education affect cognitive function, cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary events, serious fall injuries and disability in basic activities of life. They also will look at quality-of-life measures such as depression symptoms, sleep quality, stress and satisfaction with life, and will assess the cost-effectiveness of these programs for older people.

Provided by Northwestern University (news : web)

Source :Newscribe : get free news in real time

Learn from Greek debt crisis, excessive loans no good

EXCESSIVE debt build-up is something most people, companies and countries would prefer to avoid if possible. Unsustainable debt levels have broken homes, bankrupted companies and crippled a number of countries worldwide and the latest proof of this is the crisis in Greece where the debt build-up has impacted the economy of the country.

Continued debt build-up without finding a solution to minimise and eventually reverse the piling up of debt, no matter for what reason, will extract a high price in the future.

For Malaysia, while the condition is still way off from what is happening to Greece, it is nonetheless a lesson for the Government to deal with before things get out of hand.

Slashing the budget deficit, though, is not an easy task to accomplish. Cut too much too soon and the economy will take a dip as the reduction in consumption and investment by the Government will eventually be mirrored by that of the private sector.

Public debt as a percentage of GDP is now 54%, which is much higher than Indonesia’s 28% but still off the level seen in the Philippines which is at 62%. But keep spending about RM74bil a year on subsidies - or RM2,610 per person - and the indebtedness level of the Philippines will be in our country’s rear view mirror in a matter of time.

It’s therefore not a surprise to have seen over the past months initiatives taken not only to increase the efficiency in tax collection through a goods and services tax but also through ways to minimise the massive subsidy bill that is incurred by the Government on a yearly basis.

That subsidy bill is broken down into three main categories — energy, food and social services — and the largest of which is on social services at about RM43bil.

While cutting back on social and essential services, such as healthcare and education, will be the least palatable to Malaysians from all walks of life, dealing with payments, too, has to be addressed.

Take healthcare for instance. The charge of RM1 for outpatient care was introduced in 1982 and I think a small increase in such a payment, which is less than the cost of a roti canai, is due.

The subsidy on food is around RM3bil a year and is mainly spent to keep the price of flour, sugar and cooking oil down. Here, there are ways to cushion the removal or reduction of such subsidies for the poor but it will not be a stretch for middle-income households to start paying unsubsidised prices for such goods as these items will not constitute a large chuck of their monthly income on such goods.

The real area which needs to be tackled is energy cost. The Government subsidy bill to keep the price of fuel, electricity, LPG and natural gas low, based on where the global prices of energy, is slightly below RM25bil a year.

That is a huge sum and the removal of such subsidies will have a huge impact on every strata of society.
With 40% of Malaysian wage earners having an income of less than RM1,500 a month, higher energy costs, whether at the pump or in the form of a hike in monthly electricity bills, will evoke the most volatile reaction.
But presenting a case why that has to be done needs to be made.

Sure, the poor and needy will get the most protection against any reduction in subsidies but the Government, too, has to be mindful of the middle class in the country which will be most affected by an increase in energy costs.

It’s the middle class that is the foundation to consumer demand and striking a balance between reducing such subsidies and keeping people happy will be a tricky task. Appealing to people’s season of reason and articulating the consequences of not doing so may work.

People have to know that the precious resource the country is blessed with should not be frittered away. And while conservation and efficient use of energy resources will help reduce wastage and help the environment, people also need to be shown that their efforts are helping to build something worthy for the future.

Any programme of reducing energy subsidies should be met with a similar programme that will improve the economic welfare of the people. I have said this countless times, and it bears repeating once again.

Having a world-class public transportation system will give people a viable alternative to cope with higher fuel costs. Also, the money the country makes after the price of crude oil is past a certain level should be saved in a fund for future generations.

Making a Point - By Jagdev Singh Sidhu

Deputy news editor Jagdev Singh Sidhu is watching closely the developments of his favourite football team, hoping the club’s rich history does not end up being just that.

For latest pictures, news, videos on the Greek crisis and other business news from AP-Wire click here

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Shanghai World Expo economy could be better than Olympics

Watch Video

Play Video

Many analysts are predicting the economic impact of the 2010 World Expo will be three times larger than that of the 2008 Olympics. Can the effects of the six-month showcase in Shanghai really surpass what took place during the Beijing Games? And if so, how might it happen? CCTV reporter, Wang Guan, investigates in this BIZ EXPO feature.

Zhang Yiping has been working as a tourism consultant for four years. Her company provides information on traveling in and around Shanghai, and helps clients book trips.

She says the six-square-meter store receives nearly 1,000 customers every day.

Tourism consultant Zhang Yiping said, "Since April 30th, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of people. They come from across the country-Henan, Sichuan, Zhejiang and Jiangsu. Especially from Jiangsu and Zhejiang."

At the box office for the neighboring Oriental Pearl Tower, tourists aren't hesitating to pay premium holiday prices to enter the iconic structure.

The influx of visitors clearly demonstrates this event's economic muscle.

Sun Lijian, dean of Fudan University School of Economics, said, "The expo lasts longer. It's a concentrated event where you need to be there to enjoy it, rather than just watching it on TV. It will give a boost to many industries, and jump start the service sector in the Yangze River Delta Region. So the economic benefits will be more obvious, and more comprehensive, than the Olympics."

Professor Sun adds that, in addition to generating quick cash, the event will transform the city's economic growth pattern by initiating a green revolution.

To describe the low carbon concept as being widely applied in Shanghai's expo park might be a huge understatement. Tapping into environmentally friendly materials, and renewable energy sources, are the primary concerns of most pavilions. It's probably fair to say this World Expo is one of the largest showcases for low carbon technologies and lifestyles in history.

So what factors will lead to green science playing a bigger role China's economy?

Sun Lijian said, "First it's people's awareness and knowledge. Ordinary folks go to the park, and see that green lifestyles can actually make our lives so much better. With increased awareness comes demand. And with increased demand comes incentives for enterprises. The government should also cash in on low carbon technology. This will help cultivate the market."

So behind the rosy economic figures that are set to surpass the Beijing Olympics, what the Expo is really offering are new opportunities for this host city to make momentous progress.

CCTV reporter Wang Guan said, "For example, Shanghai can rebuild its brand to fast-forward its investment drawing process. It can cultivate people's awareness of our shared low carbon future. And through exchanges of new ideas and technologies, Shanghai can book a faster boat to lead China away from its label of the world's factory, and into one of its creative centers."

Special Report: Shanghai World Expo 2010

Flirting with change that Britons can believe in

DRAMA, suspense, irony and regret all clash in the chorus of confusion and contradiction in the build-up to Britain’s general election tomorrow.

This political equivalent of Britain’s Got Talent pits Labour Party Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Conservative Party leader David Cameron and Liberal Democratic Party leader Nick Clegg as keen contestants.

Popular expectations dwell on a contradiction: that Brown is going to lose heavily to Cameron, and that it will be a tight race between the three. Another contradiction is that while the sorry state of Britain’s economy is uppermost in voters’ minds, a candidate’s appeal is an inversion of his competence.

By all accounts Brown is most experienced on the economy, being Chancellor of the Exchequer (finance minister) for a full decade before becoming premier. Yet he is expected to fall the hardest, particularly from his incumbency.

The candidate with the highest jump in popularity is Clegg, who is the least experienced. Cameron’s experience with economics was as a subject at university, and for both political experience came only as Opposition MPs.

Brown’s critics say his experience has not stopped Britain’s steep economic slide. But much of the problem might have been beyond his control, since the global crisis began with Britain’s closest ally, the US.

Brown’s own decline is tied to Labour’s, whose downward spiral began with his predecessor Tony Blair’s fall from public grace after taking the nation to war three times. Brown’s liability may be limited to his naivete, such as in asking Blair to help his campaign in its closing stages this week.

Britons are worried about lax immigration controls largely because they are worried about the economy. But before Brown could absorb that, he was caught calling a lifelong Labour supporter who cornered him on immigration “a bigoted woman.”

That affected his image and his performance in the final debate, all at a crucial moment of his campaign. Besides, two terms of Blairite “New Labour” may be all that even the staunchest supporters can endure.

Beyond party rhetoric, Clegg’s Liberal Democrats seem to offer the most radical changes. On the economy all are worried about the budget deficit, but Lib-Dems are even more pro-poor and for taxing the rich than Labour.

Pensioners, the lowest-earning bracket and the first £10,000 (RM48,648) earned would be free from tax. There would be a “mansion tax” and tax loopholes for the rich would be closed.

On civil liberties, Lib-Dems have more to offer than the other two. There would be better protection for journalists, curbs on libel claims, and a freedom Bill to limit invasive CCTV security coverage.

Lib-Dems want to scrap the Trident missile system like the others, while rejecting any similar replacement.
They also want a full inquiry into Britain’s role in state kidnapping and torture, rejection of military action against Iran, pressure on Israel and Egypt to lift the Gaza blockade, and end the “subservient relationship” with the US.

The latter prompted Brown to call Clegg “anti-American,” as if championing British interests has to be anti-ally. Brown as unreformed Blairite has not understood how the British electorate has shifted its ground on his party after Blair.

Lib-Dems are the most radical on electoral reform. Not only would they introduce a written Constitution, lower the voting age to 16 and replace the House of Lords with a fully elected second chamber, they want proportional representation for voters to select more than one candidate in order of preference.

This system, practised in Ireland and Australia, is rejected by both Labour and Conservative as it could put them at a permanent disadvantage. Since they are supposed to be at opposite ends of the political spectrum, their supporters are likely to vote for the centrist Lib-Dems as second choice, virtually adding to the party aggregate to keep it in office indefinitely.

That, or the party will remain strong enough to be a kingmaker in various combinations of coalitions. If the Labour-Conservative divide based on the 19th-century division between labour and capital are now outdated in today’s industrial Britain, the Lib-Dems could be a sign of the times.

Despite the touted differences between Labour and Conservative, in office both gravitate to a middle ground of consensus politics such as “caring Conservatism” and “New Labour.” The Lib-Dems’ high profile today may just be blowing the cover of party labels to reveal modern British social democracy as it is.