Gun Culture

An article and a series of photos on Wired.com documents the awesomeness that is the Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot & Trade Show (OFASTS). After paying an admission fee of only $10 a day or $18 for the weekend (children under 10 are free), attendees can marvel at and shoot a wide variety of machine guns (to my delight, machine guns are included in the subject of technology). The climax of the expo is "Kill the Car", in which participants take aim at an explosives-packed car rolling down a hillside. Attendees included an anonymous former Apple executive, lawyers, and investors, making the OFASTS crowd not as redneck as might be suspected-- legal ownership of machine guns costs a great deal of money. OFASTS and two other expos of its kind in Kentucky and Arizona are among the largest in the country. These large expos are held in rural areas of the US, where permits to hold them are more easy to obtain. According to Wired photojournalist Pete Muller, gun-loving areas of the world are situated near state security institutions. Muller has documented conflict in Sudan and says (though it seems intuitive) that gun ownership is more common in isolated communities, especially ones in which isolation brings associated perception of danger. Gun ownership in America has historically followed Muller's observations.

The rest of the Wired article, touching on the facets of society involved in gun ownership, made me think about my reasons for being enamored of guns. Guns were integral to the way of life on the frontier and were instruments of the violence that took place there. "[I]ts sanitized memory has become a pillar of white American nostalgia," says Muller of the gun. Guns were pivotal to the American bid for independence and have come to symbolize the freedom and individuality associated with the American dream. My own experience with firearms stems from being on my high school's marksmanship team, in which shooting was a sport. I am enamored of the process of shooting rather than the implications of owning a weapon-- given the time, money, and legal steps taken to owning a gun, someday I would like to practice with one regularly. With a precision weapon, method is everything; I enjoy the ritual self-awareness that comes with regulating breath, loading, aiming, and firing, as well as the steps taken beforehand to ensure accuracy (abstaining from sugar and caffeine and achieving a sense of calm before getting to the firing line). For me, "gun" does not equal "threat" or "power" or "freedom" but signifies a yogic process of purification, so I suppose I'm different from stereotypical gun owners who want protection and see their guns as talismans against perceived threats. Firearm technology often has to do with what weapon is biggest, baddest and most efficient at killing things (at OFASTS, you can shoot a 750-rounds-per-minute M248 SAW), but that is not neccessarily what guns are wanted for.

Source: http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2012/12/pete-muller/?pid=4351

BBC Writer Picky About Skyfall; No One Cares

I was on the BBC's website yesterday and read an interesting opinion piece on the fallacies of representation of technology in Skyfall. The author of the piece used a number of examples to detail how director Sam Mendes had let viewers down in the area of technological accuracy, and despite the fact that every Bond film features its fair share of technological fiction, I found the piece interesting because when I saw Skyfall recently I found my disbelief entirely suspended. A laundry list of inaccuracies follows, all of which I happily failed to notice two weeks ago. Firstly, in the dynamic scene featuring a captive Bond talking to villain Raoul Silva in a room full of the computers Silva uses in his hacking operations, there is a conspicuous absence of background noise coming from the equipment. Also, the room in which Silva's computers are housed appears to lack air conditioning, making the chance of a fire pretty high. When Silva launches a cyberattack on MI6 later in the film, Q and Bond watch a visual representation of the code involved in the attack.... one which is entirely made up in order to give viewers something to watch. The fallacy most integral to the plot of Skyfall is Bond's radio tracker. Bond relies on this tracker during most of the film, despite the inherent difficulties of tracking via radio signal that would make his signature tough to trace aboveground and almost impossible underground, such as when Bond navigates the tunnels of the London Underground.

But all movies rely on inaccuracies to keep viewers entertained, right? (I used to think that any mention of tachyons in Star Trek signaled a section of tacky plot, until I learned that tachyons are real subatomic particles.) The benefit of sacrificing truth for entertainment is that some viewers are inspired by the excitement of technology. From an educational perspective, Skyfall highlights some of the more exciting uses of modern technology and the need for cybersecurity in today's world. Perhaps the movie will serve as an inspiration to some future computer scientists. Regardless of how accurately Skyfall represents technology, it has served its main purpose of providing high-quality entertainment and promoted Bond to further glory.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20555621

Shift in the Auto Industry: Car Operating Systems

A recent Wired article discusses a paradigm shift in the development of automotive technology-- one that goes from a mechanical drive towards more horsepower to a software-based competition to provide consumers with high-performing infotainment systems. Companies such as Microsoft and QNX Software Systems produce proprietary software for many different car companies, but many car makers have sponsored the development of open-source software. From the perspective of the auto industry, open-source infotainment systems are desirable because they would allow companies to adapt and personalize software unique to specific users. However, established software companies like Microsoft have an advantage in marketing their products to the auto industry because they have been supplying reliable software for years-- a switch to new open-source software can be seen as a risk in an industry that focuses intently on safety. Another consideration to take into account is the "upgradability" of  car's infotainment system-- so far, upgrades to software have been few, but with an increasing need for current information in some programs comes the expectation of more frequent upgrades. This consideration may become moot with the development of wireless updates, though, with Tesla Motors being the first company to successfully update a vehicle's software wirelessly.

As software becomes increasingly integrated into our cars, the design process for new vehicles may change. In the software industry, new products are developed at a much faster rate than in the auto industry, where a typical development cycle takes years. Some car companies have brought electronics executives to their management teams, an example being Ferrari, which has brought former Apple vice president of software Eddy Cue to its board of directors. On the subject of Apple: in a partnership with several automakers, Apple is adapting voice control program Siri for dashboard use, and the new program will be called Siri Eyes Free. As yet, few luxury automakers have integrated much in the way of infotainment into their car designs. The president of QNX Software Systems was quoted in Wired as saying that all of his company's customers (automakers) are interested in keeping up with the pace of the consumer electronics industry. How it will be possible to synchronize automobile and software development has yet to be concluded, but we may be seeing some changes in the auto industry in the near future.

Sources: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2012/12/automotive-os-war/
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2012/11/eddy-cue-ferrari/

Apple's Wireless Charging Patent

The latest of Apple's patent applications, a new type of wireless charger, has exciting implications for the future of technology. Apple's charger could charge devices within a radius of one yard, a step forward from inductive wireless chargers which require charger and device to be very close or touching. Inductive chargers have been around since 2009 and do not free consumers from wires, as inductive chargers need both a connection to a power source and contact with devices to be charged. The new charging technology uses a near-field magnetic resonance (NFMR) power source to charge devices with inner NFMR resonator circuits. The NFMR power source could be housed within a user's iMac while their various Apple devices in use nearby could remain constantly charged. A happy consequence of NFMR technology is that it could free devices such as mouses and keyboards from batteries, making them more eco-friendly.

Apple has further realized their goal of providing a set of products which work seamlessly in suite with one another. From the time that the patent application was filed, it will be perhaps a year or more before iMacs are released with built-in NFMR power sources. On a personal note, as a Windows user I am increasingly impressed by the efficiency and intercompatibility of Apple devices. I laugh as I write this, but I become more convinced that my next laptop should be made by Apple. Apple's reputation, carefully cultivated by its consumer base and ad campaigns as a manufacturer of modern, forward-reaching devices compatible with hipsters everywhere, used to cause me affront. Now, however, I write with three years of experience with a Windows 7 laptop that has served me well but given me a fair amount of grief. I am no longer convinced of the practicality of Microsoft systems, which do not seem to function as intuitively as iOS devices, and with every advance Apple makes I become more desirous of change.


Source: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/11/apple-wireless-charging-patent/

Low-Tech Feature: Magnetized Clothing

A new clothing line known as Affectation, funded through Kickstarter, attempts to update the apparel industry. Designer Ian Stikeleather has developed clothing that fastens exclusively with magnets. Small magnets hidden in Stikeleather's garments replace buttons and zippers and allow wearers to accessorize his otherwise simple designs. Stikeleather says that magnetized clothing is part of a larger trend towards mass customization, and he strove to provide a modular design that his customers can build from the bottom up. Putting his project on Kickstarter was part of his plan for designing Affectation; with a group of investors who acknowledge that they will be getting a piece of Affectation 1.0, Stikeleather can use early feedback to improve upon his original ideas.

What I found intriguing about the Wired article on Affectation (address below) is how the addition of new technology to clothing required Stikeleather to go through the engineering design process. First, Stikeleather had to find a type of magnet that would wear well and withstand hundreds of trips through washers and dryers. The type of fabric that houses the magnets also needed to be tested. Stikeleather himself often wore prototype garments to industry gatherings, returning to tweak his designs based on his own experience in wearing them. From the start, goals for Affectation were set: the clothing line is not intended to be practical protection against the elements but to make whatever statement its wearers intend. (A side benefit to clothing with magnets is that frees disabled wearers --such as those with arthritis-- from the difficulty of dealing with small fasteners like hooks and buttons. )


Source: http://www.wired.com/design/2012/12/reinvent-clothing-with-magnets/