Monday, 28 December 2015

Project Ara: Google Wants Your Phone to Go to Pieces

Project Ara: Google Wants Your Phone to Go to Pieces

Google’s modular smartphone will let users swap parts like screens and cameras on the fly.

The modern smartphone is a masterpiece of adaptability. It lets you talk, snap photos, and tote around sprawling media collections. Downloadable apps let you do lots of other things, too, like track your workouts, monitor your diet, or remix a song. There’s even an app that helps you find hidden treasure, thanks to software that turns your device into a metal detector using the magnetic-field sensors that make up your smartphone’s compass.
But don’t let this apparently awesome adaptability bamboozle you. For all its vaunted versatility, a smartphone is still only as good as its hardware. Though hundreds of new apps appear every day, your phone’s hardware is unchangeable beyond perhaps the option of swapping in a more spacious memory card.
This inflexibility has two drawbacks. First, your phone cannot take advantage of the steady improvements to hardware that accrue from Moore’s Law and other factors. Second, other than installing an app, you cannot modify your phone to fit your lifestyle or temporary needs.
Suppose you’re finally going on that long-dreamed-of vacation to Indonesia and want a better camera in your phone. Add-ons can give you a new lens to work with, and photo-editing software can improve the resulting pictures, but these tweaks won’t make a dramatic difference in your photos. If you really want to take better pictures with your phone, buying a new one is your only option.
Google hopes to change that this year when it releases the first iteration of Ara smartphones, which consumers will build and customize using hardware modules. At press time, Google hadn’t disclosed many details about its plans, including the exact release date or the modules that will be available when Ara debuts. But the company intends to begin sales of a “market pilot” version of the phone in 2015.
Google also announced that Chinese chip manufacturer Rockchip will provide the central processor for the device, which will be housed in a single, removable “application processor” module alongside the graphics processor and main flash drive. It was unclear as of mid-December whether the cellular antenna and radio components that allow Ara to serve as a phone will be contained within a single module or spread out over several. However, Project Ara director Paul Eremenko tells IEEE Spectrum that the phone will be capable of 4G  LTE connectivity when it launches. Other basic offerings are expected to include display modules that serve as the screen, as well as battery, microphone, speaker, and camera modules.
To turn this hodgepodge into a functioning smartphone, you’ll plug everything into an “endoskeleton” that has built-in electronics to manage the flow of data and distribute power among modules. This supporting framework will also contain a tiny backup battery, which can keep the phone alive while you swap a dead battery module for a charged one. While Google will build the endoskeleton, the module design will be left to independent developers. Members of the design team expect that a basic Ara phone could be built from materials and components that cost between US $50 and $100. The retail cost of the phone could, of course, be more, depending on the specific modules the customer chooses.
The ultimate goal, Eremenko says, is a marketplace for hardware that rivals the vitality and diversity of offerings available now in app stores. Independent developers will create modules that are compatible with the phone’s endoskeleton, in much the same way developers write apps for the Android operating system. Google has offered some initial ideas for these modules, such as a thermal imager and a pulse oximeter, which lets users measure their pulse rates and blood oxygen levels. And independent developers are brainstorming designs for a slew of other modules, including radiation detectors and haptic-feedback devices to enable the blind to read braille on their smartphones.

Launching a wireless revolution isn’t easy, and it’s a task that not even a tech giant would take on alone. Google’s Advanced Technologies and Projects group, which oversees the company’s more far-out efforts, like the 3D-mapping Tango tablet, leads Project Ara. This small group is collaborating with companies including Toshiba and universities such as Carnegie Mellon. To build a version of Android that can operate a modular phone, Google has teamed with the nonprofit engineering consortium Linaro. This organization of engineers from around the world helps to develop open-source operating systems like Android and Ubuntu. The group also hosted the Linaro Connect USA conference in California where Eremenko laid out some of the details of Project Ara.
Speaking at that conference, Eremenko said that the device would initially target people without smartphones. “There are 6 billion people who are not connected to the mobile Internet,” he told the audience. “Delivering the mobile Internet to those people could in fact be world changing.”
Does Google have the muscle to get a new kind of smartphone adopted by billions of new users? Alan DeRossett, cofounder of the firm VOXearch, which makes portable medical devices, is optimistic. One of the reasons is the burgeoning market for self-diagnostic gadgets. An Ara phone, he says, could host a suite of standardized modules that will diagnose a variety of diseases using an assortment of already available lab-on-a-chip technologies.
The beauty of the scheme, he says, is that building a device to detect diseases in the developing world wouldn’t mean abandoning other consumers who are interested in more mundane functions. “If you’re in California, you may need a fitness-monitoring module,” DeRossett notes. “In a developing country, the malaria monitor is going to be much more important to you.”


Customizing an Ara phone starts with its endoskeleton. It will come in three sizes, letting users decide whether they want a device that’s small, standard, or phablet size. The backbone of each model is laid out with a grid of slots, which can accommodate three different module shapes: small squares, large squares, and medium-size rectangles.
Every slot in the endoskeleton will have a pair of copper pins to convey power and four single-turn copper coils, each about 3 millimeters across. This layout is mirrored in each attached module, with a tenth of a millimeter between paired coils. Data is transferred across this small air gap by a technique known as inductive coupling—sending a current through one coil to induce a voltage in its partner. Because the coils don’t make physical contact, frequent swapping of modules won’t wear them down.
To manage the interchange of data between modules, Google chose an interface protocol called UniPro. Like USB, UniPro is a set of hardware and software standards that defines how devices communicate. Tech companies began developing UniPro almost a decade ago, under the auspices of the Mipi Alliance, which sets standards for mobile technology. Project Ara will be one of the first implementations of the protocol in the wild.
To make the most of its modular design, Ara will run a specialized version of the newly released Android 5.0 Lollipop operating system, which will allow for “hot swapping” of modules. With the exception of the screen and the application processor module, users will be able to remove a module and replace it with another without rebooting the phone. Want to use an Ara phone to share photos with friends? Remove the camera, plug in a pico-projector module, and start the show without ever powering down.
Battery life, which can make or break a smartphone, will be in the hands of Ara users. The device can be outfitted with more than one battery module at a time for greater capacity.
The Ara team had to come up with a connection system to ensure that modules stay firmly coupled to the phone while in use but are easy to detach when you want to swap them out. These engineers rejected mechanical latches, which would have detracted from the phone’s aesthetics and added more moving parts.
At the first Ara Developers Conference in April 2014, Google announced that it would use electropermanent magnets to connect the endoskeleton and modules. Modules will be held in place magnetically while in use. To remove one, you’ll use an app to send a brief surge of electric current through the magnets that hold it, altering their magnetization enough to free the module from the frame.


Project Ara could also change how we get rid of our smartphones. The modular design of the platform would make it easy for Ara users to swap, share, and resell components, extending their usefulness and keeping them out of landfills. A cracked screen on an Ara phone would be annoying, but it could be fixed easily by swapping in a single part. Team members estimate that the endoskeleton will have a life span of five years or more. That’s much longer than phones currently last in many parts of the world. According to the latest available data, phones get replaced every 22 months in the United States and every 27 months in South Korea.
The agnostic nature of Ara’s UniPro foundation means modules could have uses outside the endoskeleton. Imagine popping an MP3-player module out of your phone and inserting it into your car dashboard or home entertainment system. Toshiba has proposed an activity-monitoring module for Ara phones that could also operate in a wristband.
Although Ara is designed for everyone, any grand rethinking of the smartphone is bound to encounter some obstacles. For example, while some users will want to make their phones unique, others may find that level of customization daunting. And Google’s record on product launches is not spotless. “Google does many experiments,” says mobile-industry analyst Ken Dulaney. “Not all succeed.”
Eremenko admits that getting Project Ara off the ground will be a tricky proposition. When the phone launches later this year, the company will have to build a user base and a developer ecosystem simultaneously. Google thinks it can do that by building a market where niche products can thrive.
One developer, for example, is working on a battery with three times the energy density of standard smartphone batteries. It’s currently good for only 50 or so charging cycles, though. Ordinarily, Eremenko says, such innovators would be surviving on venture capital while they try to improve the technology. By turning to Ara, this company can sell a high-capacity battery with a limited life span—probably not a go-to power source, but one that some users might be interested in.
That’s the potential power of a modular phone: Because the pieces can be ordered à la carte, hardware doesn’t have to appeal to the masses to succeed. Instead, modules by independent developers and big companies alike can serve just a small community well. Eremenko and his team think there are many products like this looking for a home. With Project Ara, Google is aiming to bring them all into the fold.



The XPrize’s Lunar Deadline Looms


The XPrize’s Lunar Deadline Looms 


Aspiring moon explorers now have until 2016 to win a top prize of $20 million from Google
By Rachel Courtland
Posted 30 Dec 2014 | 18:00 GMT
img for LunerX opener
Illustration: Matthew Hollister

Griffin is a pack mule with a mission. The four-footed spacecraft is designed to carry 1.7 metric tons of fuel in its belly. It’s girded by wide aluminum deck plates, from which robotic rovers can hang like sleeping bats. It’s built to carry time capsules and cremated remains, among other potential payloads. And one day, in the not-too-distant future, a Pittsburgh-based start-up plans to send it to the moon.

One of 18 competitors remaining in the Google Lunar XPrize, the Pittsburgh company, Astrobotic, hopes to be the first private team to make a moon landing, move 500 meters across the lunar soil, and send high-definition images and video back to Earth. If it can do all of this before any of its competitors, it stands to claim a top prize of US $20 million, provided by Google.

But they don’t call it a moon shot for nothing. Now in its eighth year, the competition has seen 15 of the original 33 teams drop out. In 2009, the prize administrators moved to extend the deadline by three years, to the end of 2015. And just a few weeks before this issue of IEEE Spectrum went to press, the Google Lunar XPrize team informed us that the deadline would be extended by another year, to 31 December 2016.

Three nations have landed spacecraft on the moon, with varying rates of success.

For many prize participants and space-news enthusiasts, the change likely comes as little surprise. Aspiring explorers face some daunting hurdles between Earth and lunar glory. First, there’s the technical challenge involved in building a lunar spacecraft capable of reaching the moon and then performing a soft landing—a feat that has so far been accomplished by only three nations: the United States, the Soviet Union, and China. Then, and perhaps even more crucially, there are the financial and logistical obstacles associated with getting to space. A rocket launch can easily cost tens of millions of dollars, and it’s not easy to coordinate, particularly if you’re trying to launch on short notice or save money by piggybacking on an existing mission.

The mission is “extremely difficult and unprecedented,” both technically and financially, the XPrize Foundation said in an e-mail to Spectrum. But it’s clear that it wants competitors to get serious about leaving Earth. In addition to an extension, the new guidelines would close the contest if no team shows proof of a launch agreement by the end of 2015 . No team has yet shown such proof, an XPrize representative said.

A spin-off of Carnegie Mellon University, in Pittsburgh, Astrobotic hopes to go to the moon by selling berths on its Griffin lander and the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket it aims to use to get to space.

The company plans to offer delivery services to three unique locations: on a lunar trajectory near Earth, an orbit around the moon, and the lunar surface. Transport all the way down is currently priced at about $1.2 million per kilogram, says CEO John Thornton.

graphic link to Fast Forward sidebarFor its maiden voyage, Astrobotic aims to send Griffin to Lacus Mortis, where there is a roughly 150-meter-wide opening in the surface, first spotted several years ago by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. The pit, which is collapsed on one side, could potentially provide an easy-to-access shelter that could shield future lunar explorers from radiation and micrometeorites.

Astrobotic has already penned agreements to deliver cremated remains managed by the space-burial company Celestis, based in Houston, and a time capsule made by a Singapore-based company, Astroscale. The capsule will contain messages from children and a Japanese sports drink called Pocari Sweat. But the XPrize will be a big part of the financing for the first mission, says Thornton. SpaceX’s “front-door” price for a Falcon 9 is about $60 million, he says. To make up for the cost, Astrobotic aims to use Griffin to deliver the company’s own rover and vehicles of other lunar XPrize teams. So far, one competitor has signed on, Thornton says, and there should be space for more than half of those teams still participating.

Astrobotic now has many of the ingredients needed to perform a safe lunar landing. Building off work done more than 10 years ago for the DARPA Grand Challenge, an autonomous-vehicle competition, chief technology officer Kevin Peterson and his colleagues have built a computer-vision system designed to help the spacecraft track its progress toward the lunar landing site by comparing real-time images taken by Griffin with reference pictures of the surface.

The team has made feature-recognition algorithms that allow the spacecraft’s computer—a garden-variety, military-grade motherboard with an Intel i7 core—to process images at the speed required for a moon touchdown: roughly 10 frames per second. In June 2014, the team used this system, in concert with a scanning laser, to guide a rocket-powered vehicle built by Masten Systems down to a landing from some 260 meters in the air. The combination could also detect surface obstacles as small as a soccer ball.
Astrobiotic Griffin lander
Photo: Nick and Drew Hagelin
A World Away: Astrobotic’s Griffin lander, photographed in 2014 at a “mooncast” at the LaFarge slag heap in West Mifflin, Pa.

To win the lunar XPrize, Astrobotic must incorporate this capability into a fully integrated lander—and get it off the ground well before the end of 2016. Astrobotic says its technology will be ready to go by the deadline. But much will depend on whether it can cobble together funding for the mission and reserve a rocket in time.

“The biggest challenge of this prize is the financing,” Thornton says. What’s more, he says, there is the possibility that SpaceX’s 2016 launch manifest will fill before Astrobotic is ready to claim a spot. But even if Astrobotic can’t get customers in line in time to make a bid for the lunar XPrize, he says, it will still aim for a launch: “We’re not driven by a particular date or prize. We’re out to make a sustainable business operation where we’re regularly transporting payload to the surface of the moon.”

Astrobotic isn’t the only team with a go-for-it-regardless stance. Another is the Penn State Lunar Lion team, based at Pennsylvania State University and still at the beginning stages of fund-raising and spacecraft construction. The extension will surely allow the Lunar Lion team to stay in the running for at least a bit longer, but making the deadline doesn’t concern team leader Michael Paul. The Google Lunar XPrize is “a great fire in the belly,” Paul says, but his main goal is to grow aerospace talent for the university. Already, he says, “there are companies that are coming here to recruit from the team.”

Competitor SpaceIL, an educational nonprofit in Israel, is also set on the moon, prize or no. “We’re 100 percent going to the moon,” declares director of business development Daniel Saat. Getting the prize would just be a bonus: “At the end of the day, the prize is dessert,” he says.

SpaceIL wants to give Israel its own Apollo moment. “Our mission is to land the first Israeli spacecraft on the moon,” Saat says. It’s a goal that’s resonated with many Israelis. SpaceIL has already raised $36 million—enough, Saat says, for them to get to the moon. The team has made outreach a priority and has so far reached some 60,000 schoolchildren through in-class presentations, he adds.

Now with more than 30 full-time staff, the group is just beginning work on flight hardware, which will be assembled in a facility managed by Israel Aerospace Industries. The team recently signed a contract for the construction of a $1 million onboard transceiver, which will be built by Space Micro, a San Diego–based hardware firm.

But SpaceIL is still struggling to find a ride. While Astrobotic plans to purchase an entire rocket for its mission, SpaceIL aims to go with the cheaper approach of piggybacking on an existing launch. Saat estimates that this should run about $10 million to $15 million.
animated gif showing landing
Full Video: Masten's Xombie Flight Tests Astrobotic's Autonomous Landing System

Finding a shared berth has proved challenging. Piggybacking payloads is routine nowadays, but rocket companies and their customers are generally squeamish about a cargo that’s carrying a load of extra propellant, because it might endanger the primary payload. As Saat puts it: “For us to come with a spacecraft that’s 80 percent rocket fuel and stick it to the side? They’re not always as excited as we are about that.”

“There’s no commercial market today for sending secondary payloads to deep space—or primary payloads, for that matter,” says Andrew Barton, director of technical operations for the Google Lunar XPrize. “This is definitely charting new waters for the industry.” And that’s a good thing: “That’s one of the intents of the prize,” he notes.

Team Phoenicia, a former competitor based in California, has jumped in to see what it can do to help the launch market. After dropping its prize bid in 2013, the team reinvented itself as a launch broker and is now gathering customers together for a ride to space on an as-yet-unannounced rocket. The Lunar Lion team has reserved one of about 20 slots available for larger spacecraft, Team Phoenicia CEO William Baird says.

Incentive prizes have been used before to spur activity in aerospace, and extensions are nothing new. Charles Lindbergh won the $25,000 Orteig Prize with the first nonstop New York–Paris flight in 1927, after the prize went unclaimed and the competition was extended by five years.

Still, extensions can be counterproductive, notes Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist and space historian at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass. When we interviewed him before this latest lunar prize extension, he said that another deadline change could make it hard to take future incentive-prize deadlines seriously. Better, he says, to divert the unclaimed prize money to a new competition.

As 2015 progresses, we’ll see how far teams move along. But we’ll have to wait a while more before it’s clear whether any teams will make the revised deadline.

Regardless of what’s to come, McDowell says the competition has already done a lot to stimulate new activity and excitement about space. “I think it was always a pretty long shot,” he says, “[but] I don’t think it will have been a waste.”

How Aldebaran Robotics Built Its Friendly Humanoid Robot, Pepper

How Aldebaran Robotics Built Its Friendly Humanoid Robot, Pepper 


The French company worked in secret for two years to create Pepper. Now Japanese telecom giant SoftBank is ready to sell it to consumers
By Erico Guizzo
Posted 26 Dec 2014 | 20:00 GMT
Video: Erico Guizzo

The robot seems determined to put a bigger smile on the man’s face. “Are you smiling from the bottom of your heart?” it asks. The man chuckles. “That’s what I’m talking about,” the robot quips in a high-pitched voice. Then, just for good measure, it bows its plastic head and apologizes for being “too bossy to our CEO.”
img for Diagnostics opener
Illustration: Matthew Hollister

The CEO is Masayoshi Son, founder and chairman of telecom giant SoftBank and Japan’s richest person. As such, he has overseen the development of hundreds of new products as part of a vast conglomerate of mobile-phone carriers, Internet ventures, and media companies. But last June, at a press conference outside Tokyo, Son climbed onstage to unveil a pet project: a humanoid robot named Pepper. Designed to be a companion in the home, it is the world’s first full-scale humanoid to be offered to consumers. In February, SoftBank plans to start selling it in Japan for 198,000 yen (less than US $2,000), plus a monthly subscription fee. Taiwanese electronics manufacturer Foxconn, known for building iPhones and iPads for Apple, will produce the robots.

For that kind of money, don’t expect anything like Rosie, the robot maid from “The Jetsons.” What you’ll get is a two-armed, 1.2-meter-tall robot that rolls around on a wheeled base. It can dance and gesture with some grace, but its manipulation skills are limited, and it’s unclear how much autonomy the robot has; at the launch event, most of its actions were clearly preprogrammed. At home, Pepper won’t be able to fold your laundry or clear the dinner table.
Special Report: 2015 Top Tech to Watch

How Aldebaran Robotics Built Its Friendly Humanoid Robot, Pepper
The Xprize’s Lunar Deadline Looms
Bringing HIV Labs by Backpack to Rural Africa
Topaz Turns On 9 Million Solar Panels
Project Ara: Google Wants Your Phone to Go to Pieces
Flying Selfie Bots: Tag-Along Video Drones Are Here
Europe’s Smart Highway Will Shepherd Cars From Rotterdam to Vienna
Mostly Right! Updates on Our 2014 Predictions

And that’s fine with SoftBank, which says Pepper is not a utilitarian automaton. It is designed to provide advice and company: It’ll tell you jokes, play games with you, teach you a new subject, and help you communicate with family and friends. Pepper will read a recipe aloud while you do the cooking. Onstage with Son, it spoke Japanese, but it is also fluent in English, French, and Spanish.
3 robots cost
Data sources: iRobot; SoftBank; Willow Garage
Cost of Three Notable Robots
(U.S. dollars)

While single-task robots like the Roomba vacuum are becoming more popular (and affordable), general-purpose robotic platforms like the PR2, which can fold laundry and fetch you a drink, are still costly laboratory playthings.

To do all that, the robot is equipped with an “emotion engine”—software that attempts to infer how a user is feeling based on facial expressions, tone of voice, and speech, allowing the robot to respond accordingly. If you arrive home and look a bit down, Pepper will play your favorite song, for instance. “We want to have a robot that maximizes joy and minimizes sadness,” Son said.

SoftBank is betting that people are ready for that kind of experience. Humanoids have long captured our imaginations, but until now they’ve been notably absent from our homes, where the only robotic inhabitants you’ll find today are small mechatronic toys and Roomba vacuum cleaners. It’s still too early to tell whether Pepper will be a hit, but its arrival may be a sign that robotics technology is beginning to catch up with science fiction.

It seems natural that Japan, a nation known for its love of everything robotic, would be the first market for a home humanoid. But it may come as a surprise that SoftBank, as it sought partners to develop Pepper, didn’t join forces with Honda, Sony, Toyota, or any other big Japanese company with robotics expertise. Instead, it turned to a much smaller and lesser-known French robotics firm called Aldebaran.

Tucked in a narrow tree-lined street on the southwest edge of Paris, Aldebaran’s headquarters occupies several floors of a modern office building. Robots and humans mingle casually as if in a scene from Star Wars. A Pepper robot greets employees near the coffee machine. Another—wearing a blond wig that someone thought would make for a stylish upgrade—watches people going by in a hallway. In a glass-walled room, a dozen robots speak and roam aimlessly, testing their own endurance.

I approach a Pepper and strike up a conversation, but the robot doesn’t seem to get what I’m saying. An employee comes over and tells the robot to speak English. Voilà! Now Pepper and I can understand each other—sort of. When I ask the robot what it is capable of doing, it responds by describing a game it wants to play. The employee shows me how to improve my human-robot interaction skills: I have to look at Pepper’s face and speak more clearly. I ask again what it can do. “I can do lots of things,” this Pepper tells me, “because the engineers who programmed me are very smart.”
AntoineDoyen
Photo: Antoine Doyen
Bruno Maisonnier, founder and CEO of Aldebaran Robotics, wants to bring friendly companion robots into people’s homes.

SoftBank seems to agree. Four years ago, Masayoshi Son decided he wanted robotics to be part of his vast business empire, and he sent emissaries to evaluate the world’s top robotics companies. Aldebaran, despite being relatively small, stood out in its ability to design robots that offer a highly interactive experience. Aldebaran’s flagship robot is a knee-high humanoid called Nao. More than 6,000 Naos are now used in research labs, schools, and hospitals in 70 countries. Longer term, the company is also developing a 1.4-meter-tall legged humanoid called Romeo.

“The most important role of robots will be as kind and emotional companions to enhance our daily lives, to bring happiness, to surprise us, to help people grow,” says Aldebaran founder and CEO Bruno Maisonnier, an executive who quit a career in finance to pursue his dream of creating robots for everyone.

Son and Maisonnier met and realized they shared the vision of taking robots out of the lab and into everyday life. Together, they could do something for robotics “that could be really world changing,” Maisonnier recalls thinking. In early 2012, SoftBank acquired a majority stake in Aldebaran and agreed to fund the company’s growth. For Aldebaran, the acquisition meant that nearly overnight, the company had to focus almost exclusively on the Pepper project.

graphic link to Fast Forward sidebarSoftBank gave Aldebaran just three months to build the first prototype, and after that it demanded to see a demonstration every two or three months. Aldebaran’s strategy was to build on its experience with Nao and develop a “stretched up” version of the smaller humanoid. As an example, Rodolphe Gelin, Aldebaran’s research director, says the engineers adapted the joint mechanisms in Nao’s arms for use in Pepper. “Our robots share many things in common, and that allowed us to do things in a time frame that otherwise would be impossible,” he says.
EricoGuizzoPeppers
Photo: Erico Guizzo
In this room at Aldebaran’s Paris headquarters, Pepper heads, torsos, and arms endure a battery of mechanical and thermal tests.

A team of designers and artists created a sleek, friendly looking shell for the robot. And the engineering team stuffed its body with 20 electric motors, an Intel Atom–based computer, two cameras, a 3-D sensor, four microphones, and a lithium-ion battery that lets Pepper run for 12 hours. A tablet on the robot’s chest displays information and provides another way to interact with the robot.

Gwennael Gate, one of the software directors, says that a big challenge was dealing with the robot’s huge computing needs while “making sure that the CPU is not exploding.” Each function is controlled by one of about 20 software engines. If you’re standing far from the robot, for instance, its awareness engine makes the robot move its head and emit sounds to try to get your attention. If you come closer, a dialogue engine kicks in, so you and Pepper can have a conversation. If you ask the robot to dance, a motion engine takes over.

In Aldebaran’s first trip to SoftBank’s Tokyo headquarters, in April 2012, the engineers gathered in a room filled with Japanese executives. Suddenly, the doors opened and everyone went silent. Masayoshi Son entered, took a seat, and stared at the Pepper prototype in front of him. The first demo was simple enough: The engineers turned the robot on, and it did a little dance. Almost immediately, Son was “like a kid,” beaming at the robot, an Aldebaran engineer told me.
Video: Erico Guizzo

What followed was an intense two years for the French company. Engineers worked day and night, with no breaks for weekends or holidays. “Aldebaran never slept during this period,” Gate said. The head count ballooned to 500 people at one point, with offices expanding not only at the Paris headquarters but also in Tokyo, Boston, and Shanghai. The work culminated in the demo of all demos: the highly produced, Apple-esque launch, where Son would introduce Pepper to the world. Aldebaran and SoftBank rehearsed the event several times a day for an entire month, using stand-ins for Son and Maisonnier.

The emotion engine, which Son highlighted in the event, uses the robot’s vision system to detect smiles, frowns, and surprise, and it uses speech recognition to sense the tone of voice and to detect certain words indicative of strong feelings, like “love” and “hate.” The engine then computes a numeric score that quantifies the person’s overall emotion as positive or negative.

Aldebaran admits the system is not very sophisticated, but the company promises that it will improve. In the future, the system could also incorporate ethics, empathy, and other qualities and behaviors that the company believes robots need in order to be part of people’s lives. The emotion engine is something Maisonnier wants “embedded at the core of our humanoid operating system, because it defines who our robots are and how they behave.”

Not everyone is convinced that people will want a Pepper at home—at least not until the robot can do some actual chores. The robot will have “a very difficult time getting off the ground as a viable consumer product,” a robotics observer told PCWorld. Others have accused SoftBank of hyping Pepper’s capabilities. The technology website The Verge found the robot’s emotion-recognition skills disappointing, saying that “Pepper has a heart of COBOL.”

SoftBank counters that it is pricing the robot very aggressively, which should help drive demand. Indeed, Son says he’s willing to lose money selling the robots until the company can ramp up volume and reduce costs—?a strategy he’s used successfully in the mobile industry. Still, it’s unclear whether consumers will be convinced of Pepper’s usefulness, especially outside Japan. SoftBank has yet to articulate its plans for international sales.

Maisonnier says Pepper will become more capable over time, as developers create new applications for it. Users will then be able to download and install these new functionalities, just as they add new apps to their smartphones. “The most important thing is to have a huge community of people trying, experimenting,” he says. “This community will create the applications that will make the next wave of people want to have the robot.”

Last September, SoftBank and Aldebaran held a developers conference in Tokyo, where they revealed details about Pepper’s technology and a set of software-development tools. A thousand attendees showed up, 600 of whom preordered a robot.

And while Aldebaran will continue working to make its existing robots smarter and more capable, it doesn’t plan to stop there. With the experience it gained developing Pepper, the company wants to build new robots for other customers—a strategy that SoftBank supports. Aldebaran doesn’t yet know what these Pepper cousins will look like, but it’s exploring ideas with banks, insurance companies, and retail stores.

Maisonnier believes Pepper’s debut is the beginning of a revolution whose effects will eventually be of the same magnitude as those of the PC, the Internet, and mobile phones. “People want robots, and they’re frustrated because there are no robots,” he says. “We’re going to give people the robots they’ve been waiting for.”
Fast Forward
When Will We Have Robot Servants?
Not anytime soon, but personal robots will invade our homes
robot Servents
Illustration: MCKIBILLO

By 2020: Pepper appears to be the first of a new breed of personal robots designed to be helpers and companions in the home. In the next five years, several others will become available. One of them, set to ship later this year, is Jibo, a chatty, coffee-machine-size robot created by Cynthia Breazeal, a pioneer of social robotics at MIT. Another robot that will likely hit the market before 2020 is a larger, mobile machine developed by Hoaloha Robotics, a Seattle start-up that targets the health-care market. What we believe Pepper, Jibo, and the Hoaloha robot will have in common is that they’ll be interactive, expressive robots that communicate with users through voice and touch screens; in addition to their built-in functionalities, they’ll also run third-party applications. So with this first generation of home robots, we should see the emergence of a community of developers focused on robot applications. These robot apps will revolve around entertainment, communication, and education, so don’t expect the robots to take over your domestic chores just yet.

By 2025: Within the next 10 years, more personal robots—with different sizes, capabilities, and prices—will arrive in our homes, offered by established robot makers, big electronics companies, and new robotics start-ups. More robo-companions will mean greater demand for robot applications, and a growing population of developers will strive to build the most compelling—and profitable—apps. But the biggest shift will be in the robots’ vision and manipulation skills, which will be vastly improved and allow our robotic cohabitants to begin to perform some useful tasks for us. They still won’t be able to cook or clean as well as a human, but they might help you chop some veggies or pick up toys from the floor. This generation of robot helpers will still be slow and imperfect, but they’ll be smarter than their predecessors. At least when they break, they’ll be able to call customer service themselves. —E.G.

Why HC Lets You Rest Easy with Better Resiliency and Data Protection

Why HC Lets You Rest Easy with Better Resiliency and Data Protection


The true value of data protection is in making systems available after a failure. Data protection starts with surviving failure of server hardware components, then extends to recovering damage to a VM and further to recovering from the loss of a whole data center. A data protection strategy should address multiple levels of failure. It should offer the business certainty of the time to recover from each level and certainty of the potential data loss for each failure. SimpliVity has built data protection into their product from the lowest level.

A fundamental part of data protection is to protect against the failure of the storage media. SimpliVity uses hardware RAID adapters in each node. The physical server has at least two RAID controllers, and hard disks are protected with RAID6, so data is still protected while recovering from a single hard disk failure. Each node also has SSDs for performance, which are protected with RAID5 so they remain in operation if one SSD fails. The VM data is always stored on two SimpliVity nodes. This keeps data available even if a whole node is unavailable.

The foundation for SimpliVity’s data protection is their OmniStack Data Virtualization Platform. The The Data Virtualization Platform provides deduplicated, compressed and optimized storage for VMs and stores VM data and metadata that has been deduplicated. A VM can be backed up instantly without copying any data blocks, so a hundred VMs can be backed up just as fast as one. This instant backup of a VM means that you can perform backups as often as the business needs—if the business needs to backup an application every hour, then SimpliVity has you covered.
SimpliVity’s scope of deduplication is global. Every node in every cluster can use the same deduplicated data. A VM can be replicated to another data center simply by replicating its unique blocks—so whether a hundred VMs or two are being replicated, any block shared by the VMs is copied only once. Deduplication for replication across a WAN allows a slower and, therefore, cheaper WAN link.

Hyperconverged Infrastructure for Dummies
Consider patch Tuesday, when a hundred VMs all apply the same Windows updates. If you use storage that replicates changes, then you must replicate a hundred sets of changes. With SimpliVity, because only the unique blocks are replicated and less than 1% of the changes will be unique, less than 1% of the amount of data needs to be replicated. That hourly VM backup that the business needs can be replicated to another site every hour, then to a third site every day if you need it. Backups and replication are controlled by a policy set on each VM. No need to check whether a backup completed, just check that the VM is compliant with its backup policy.
Because each backup is truly a complete copy of the VM, VM restores are simply a matter of registering and powering on. Everything is complete in seconds. For Windows VMs, file level restore is supported.

Data protection and resiliency is designed into the SimpliVity platform at every level. The architecture allows multiple failures at different levels without losing VM availability. From simple disk failure all the way to catastrophic data center loss, SimpliVity has the answers.


Top 10 Strategic IT Trends For 2015

Top 10 Strategic IT Trends For 2015



Symposium/ITxpo is under way in Orlando. As always, their IT experts have identified what they believe to be the top-ten information technology trends for the year ahead. Strategic technology trends are defined as having potentially significant impact on organizations in the next three years. Here is a summary of the trends:

1. Computing Everywhere
With the continued advancement in smart-phone technology, Gartner assesses that an increased emphasis on serving the needs of the mobile user in diverse contexts and environments, as opposed to focusing on devices alone. Gartner posits that smart-phones and wearable devices are part of a broader computing offering to include connected screens in the workplace and in public spaces. User experience design will be of critical importance.

2. The Internet of Things (IoT)
The Internet of Things will continue to expand, propelled by the ubiquity of user-oriented computing. Gartner posits that this will be replicated both in industrial and in operational contexts, as it will be the focus of digital business products and processes. Embedding technology more deeply will create touch points for users everywhere. This will form the foundation of digital business.

3. 3D Printing
The cost of 3D printing will decrease in the next three years, leading to rapid growth of the market for these low-cost machines. Industrial use will also continue its rapid expansion. Gartner highlights that expansion will be especially great in industrial, biomedical and consumer applications, highlighting the extent to which this trend is real, proving that 3D printing is a viable and cost-effective way to reduce costs through improved designs, streamlined prototyping and short-run manufacturing.

4. Advanced, Pervasive, Invisible Analytics
Analytics will continue to advance due to the Internet of things and the embedded devices that trend will continue to foster. Vast pools of structured and unstructured data inside and outside organizations will continue to be generated. Gartner points out that every app will need to be an analytic app. The analysis also concludes that big questions and big answers are more important than big data.
5. Context-Rich Systems
Embedded intelligence that is ubiquitous combined with pervasive analytics will foster the development of systems that are alert and responsive to surroundings. Gartner highlights that context-aware security is an early application of this trend, but that others will emerge.

6. Smart Machines
Analytics combined with an understanding of context will usher in smart machines. Advanced algorithms will lead to systems that learn for themselves and act upon those learnings. Gartner notes that machine helpers will continue to evolve from the existing prototypes for autonomous vehicles, advanced robots, virtual personal assistants and smart advisors. The analysis goes on to speculate that the smart machine era will be the most disruptive in the history of IT.

7. Cloud/Client Architecture
Mobile computing and cloud computing continue to converge and lead to the growth of centrally coordinated applications that can be delivered to any device. Gartner notes that cloud computing is the foundation of elastically scalable, self-service computing for both internally and externally facing applications. Apps that use intelligence and storage of client device effectively will benefit from lowering bandwidth costs, coordination and management will be based on the cloud. The analysis goes on to note that over time applications will evolve to support simultaneous use of multiple devices. In the future, games and enterprise applications alike will use multiple screens and exploit wearables and other devices to deliver an enhanced experience.

8. Software-Defined Infrastructure and Applications
Agile development methods for programming of everything from infrastructure basics to applications is essential to enable organizations to deliver the flexibility required to make the digital business work. Software defined networking, storage, data centers and security are maturing. Application programming interface (API) calls render cloud services software configurable, and applications have rich APIs to access their function and content programmatically. Gartner notes that in order to deal with the rapidly changing demands of digital business with demand shifts both up and down require computing to move away from static to dynamic models.

9. Web-Scale IT
Gartner notes that more companies will think, act, and build applications and infrastructure in the same way that technology stalwarts like Amazon, Google GOOGL +2.17%, and Facebook do.  There will be an evolution toward web-scale IT as commercial hardware platforms embrace the new models and cloud-optimised and software-defined methods become mainstream. Gartner notes that the marriage of development and operations in a coordinated way (referred to as DevOps) is the first step towards the web-scale IT.


10. Risk-Based Security and Self-Protection
Lastly, the analysis concludes that security will remain an important consideration through this evolution toward the digital future, but it should not be so heavy-handed as to impede progress. As many companies have recognized that 100 percent security solutions are not feasible, this will become more mainstream, and more sophisticated meathods of risk assessment and risk mitigation from a process and tool perspective will be implemented. Gartner notes that perimeter defense will be broadly recognized as inadequate, and multi-faceted approaches will be devised.  Security aware application design, dynamic and static application security testing, and runtime application self-protection, combined with active context-aware and adaptive access controls will all be necessary.

The Brain vs. The Computer

The Brain vs. The Computer



Throughout history, people have compared the brain to different inventions. In the past, the brain has been said to be like a water clock and a telephone switchboard. These days, the favorite invention that the brain is compared to is a computer. Some people use this comparison to say that the computer is better than the brain; some people say that the comparison shows that the brain is better than the computer. Perhaps, it is best to say that the brain is better at doing some jobs and the computer is better at doing other jobs.
Let's see how the brain and the computer are similar and different.


The Brain vs. The Computer: Similarities and Differences

Difference
The brain uses chemicals to transmit information; the computer uses electricity. Even though electrical signals travel at high speeds in the nervous system, they travel even faster through the wires in a computer.

A computer uses switches that are either on or off ("binary"). In a way, neurons in the brain are either on or off by either firing an action potential or not firing an action potential. However, neurons are more than just on or off because the "excitability" of a neuron is always changing. This is because a neuron is constantly getting information from other cells through synaptic contacts. Information traveling across a synapse does NOT always result in a action potential. Rather, this information alters the chance that an action potential will be produced by raising or lowering the threshold of the neuron.
Computer memory grows by adding computer chips. Memories in the brain grow by stronger synaptic connections.
It is much easier and faster for the brain to learn new things. Yet, the computer can do many complex tasks at the same time ("multitasking") that are difficult for the brain. For example, try counting backwards and multiplying 2 numbers at the same time. However, the brain also does some multitasking using the autonomic nervous system. For example, the brain controls breathing, heart rate and blood pressure at the same time it performs a mental task.
The human brain has weighed in at about 3 pounds for about the last 100,000 years. Computers have evolved much faster than the human brain. Computers have been around for only a few decades, yet rapid technological advancements have made computers faster, smaller and more powerful.
The brain needs nutrients like oxygen and sugar for power; the computer needs electricity to keep working.
It is easier to fix a computer - just get new parts. There are no new or used parts for the brain. However, some work is being done with transplantation of nerve cells for certain neurological disorders such as Parkinson's disease. Both a computer and a brain can get "sick" - a computer can get a "virus" and there are many diseases that affect the brain. The brain has "built-in back up systems" in some cases. If one pathway in the brain is damaged, there is often another pathway that will take over this function of the damaged pathway.

The brain is always changing and being modified. There is no "off" for the brain - even when an animal is sleeping, its brain is still active and working. The computer only changes when new hardware or software is added or something is saved in memory. There IS an "off" for a computer. When the power to a computer is turned off, signals are not transmitted.
The computer is faster at doing logical things and computations. However, the brain is better at interpreting the outside world and coming up with new ideas. The brain is capable of imagination.
Scientists understand how computers work. There are thousands of neuroscientists studying the brain. Nevertheless, there is still much more to learn about the brain. "There is more we do NOT know about the brain, than what we do know about the brain"