The idea that customers just “license” software products instead of owning them has manifested and I see a daunting development in the consumer electronics world that could potentially lead to products becoming obsolete because the associated software is deemed obsolete by the manufacturer.
Unfortunately, it’s true that a heavier car (like an SUV) is often safer, simply because it’s heavier.
Macs still have this incredibly useful, not very well-known feature: target disk and target boot mode. In combination, they allow you to boot one Mac using the boot partition of another Mac. Why is that useful? Well, here’s the number one use-case: If you have a MacBook – a portable work computer – but need more processing power (or a quieter workspace), you can hook up your MacBook to an faster desktop Mac and work with all the data and preferences just as if you’d be working on your MacBook. This is also useful for working with sensitive data that shouldn’t be copied to another drive as your Data essentially remains on the other boot computer’s drive.
For robots to serve us better, they need to be able to tell the difference between humans and other, potentially malicious robots.
Every time we prove we're not a robot through reCAPTCHA, robots get a tiny bit smarter. This means that in the future, the threshold for proving that we're not robots will go up, which means that we'll have to answer more complex questions to the robots that ask us for the proof that we're not robots. The increasing complexity of those questions answered also increases the quality of the learning potential for the robots.
It's an interesting cycle that just got started in the last years
In the future, we'll have gained a lot of time to spend, having to work less because robots will work for us.
But we'll spend more time proving that we're not robots in return.
Right now, this development is marginal, but in a few years, with exponentially increasing processing power and decentralized machine learning, it'll become significant.
I don’t have a problem with paying for quality content and I believe, a large number internet users don’t either. If millions of people used to pay to have their newspapers delivered, why shouldn’t that work in the internet age?
Especially in the last few years, with adblocker user base steadily increasing, online newspapers would try to fight back by setting up paywalls.
The general consensus is that people are just less willing to pay for things online. But online shopping is booming, so which is it? Is it because we’re talking about digital, intangible goods? Then why are people spending billions of dollars on coins for their social farming games? Other theories state that it’s a barrier between them and the user or an overabuncance of competitors and free offerings.
So even though publishers want to push for this model, they have to admit that it doesn’t work and take it down whenever they realize that someone actually wants to read their content.
Here’s my thesis about why paywalls really don’t work.
Dithering is a technique used to mitigate the loss of depth in a quantization process of any signal and is often used in computer graphics to reduce the perception of “steps” and increase visual fidelity.
There are different approaches to this and the original concept is way older than computer graphics. However, even though it’s widely adopted, it often isn’t done right.
In principle, the idea is to apply noise to make use of spatial resolution to make up for the lack of depth-resolution. In computer graphics, this means that, if the color depth isn’t sufficient and you don’t have enough distinct colors at your disposal, you can scatter dots of different colors around your image to trick people’s perception into seeing more colors, because they “blend” colors together. Dithering works for systems where there’s a certain inertia in place – like the human eye.
The big fallacy here, however, is the assumption that noise can be applied after the quantization process. The Wikipedia article on this is technically correct, but potentially misleading.
The proper way to dither is to apply noise as part of the quantization process itself and keep the brightness values between the quantization values above and below the original value which I’ll explain here.
Urbanization is typically self-reinforcing.
People move to urban centers (or places convert into urban centers) because there is better infrastructure and coverage of services like education and shopping opportunities.
Parallel to that, whenever people are living close together, infrastructure and amenities can be more efficiently provided.
This means that urbanization leads to more urbanization.
As this New York Times article elaborated over 20 years ago, whenever there is a new technology that has the potential to shape landscapes, there are winners and losers.
When electricity was introduced, it was urban centers that were the first to get access to the power grid. Even running water was quickly picked up in developed countries hundreds of years ago and was an important milestone in development, both for health but also the economy (people spending less time fetching water).
In a historical context and especially considering their significance, the few decades these developments took are short.
However, considering the rapid technological developments at the moment, it needs to go way faster with access to broadband Internet.
Mainstream internet access has been around for 20 years, yet even in first-world countries like Germany, you can’t get broadband internet everywhere, but mostly in cities. As a result, companies that rely on connectivity, and with them, people, move into cities, abandoning the countryside.
Now here’s the catch… unlike electricity or running water, the technology evolves faster than it “dissolves” into the countryside. In theory, everything will eventually be available anywhere. But by the time it is, it’s already outdated.
I can’t believe, I’m writing this in 2018, but the Internet does need a little push for general availability, or the difference between urban centers and remove areas and with it the income gap will get worse.
(Image credit: NASA)
Getting more people to use public transportation isn’t just a financial question.
As the software running the internet of things gets more and more complex, it won’t even require hardware failure to render our future cars, refrigerators or toasters obsolete.
There were Head-tracking VR-Devices before. But now, the time seems to be right for a breakthrough. While I'll watch the race between the Oculus Rift, HTC Vive and Sony Playstation VR closely, I'll already declare a winner: Playstation VR.
It may sound absurd, given the theoretical technical advantage of its competitors. Not only the higher display resolution but larger computing power of desktop machines compared to the Playstation 4 should make the Rift and Vive superior choices. But, like previous format wars have shown, consumers don't necessarily make the technologically best choice. This doesn't mean they necessarily make the worse choice either. But here's the reason, why the Playstation VR will be the best choice for consumers.
Advances in user interface development enable the inception of whole new categories of products. It's tempting to apply these smart innovations to other products, without an inherent need to do so from the user experience perspective.
Ok, It happened again. I registered at some website and they've sent me the password in plain text. Yes, this post was really written in 2015.
The fact that something will "only take a couple of seconds" is no excuse for disrupting the user experience and when considering to ask users for a favor, developers should not only think about what it means for their users, but what it would mean if similar products employed the same functionality.
User experience consistency is something that many companies in the media business — especially the game industry — disregard but, as I'm going to show, has accounted for the success of some of the greatest and most profitable content distribution systems
This script for Autodesk Maya 2011 will read the notation of a chess game and convert it to an animation.
You can simply get the notation of a chess game (for example, from the OS X chess game app), do some search&replace, put the string in like 53 (hardcoded because i''m lazy :P) and run the script in the provided sample scene.
Feel free to replace the pieces with anything you like, but I provided a set of 3D chess pieces with the sample scene.
Let me, even as a justification to my inner geek, explain to you why I print things from the internet for myself.
Many video games are designed to evolve over time. The development process isn't finished once the game is released but is to be continued as long as there's demand. Most games designed that way are subscription-based online games. The demand can easily be foreseen by looking at the number of active subscriptions and the development of additional content and updates is funded by the subscription fees.
Until about 5 years ago, additional content for anything but MMORPGs was usually delivered by releasing a sequel to the first game, based on the same engine or by releasing an expansion pack.
I'd like to discuss an internet phenomenon here. It's quite old now, but the long time it survived makes it even more interesting to analyze.