Some rights reserved by o5com on Flickr.com -- image licensed by Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic

Tor has caught my eyes recently.  It seems to me Tor is great for anonymizing a user, but it’s not so great in protecting privacy unless the user is serious enough and encrypting everything he or she has to send through Tor.  Anyhow, I’m new to Tor, and so what I write about Tor in this blog post might need to be revised again in the near future.  Suggestions for corrections are welcome!  As always, I dabble on!

Let work backward a little!  Why Tor is great at anonymizing and not protecting privacy?  Well, Tor is known for being great at obscuring the identity of the data source.  Did I say identity?  It’s all about hiding (i.e., anonymizing) the IP addresses of the Internet users.  Here is an example, let say you want to visit a website, but you do not want to reveal an IP address of yours to this website, Tor is perfectly well-suited in hiding your IP address and so a website will not be able to know that it’s you who have visited it.

Tor is so able in obscuring an IP address for Tor has not a central router where every connection’s identity is made known.  Yes, I know it’s hard to understand what I mean by the previous sentence, but it means Tor relies on random folks like you to run Tor exit relay or non-exit relay (i.e., another meaning — Tor router).  The magic is happening when each Tor exit relay or non-exit relay sends the data onto the next destination.

Did I say magic?  Tor relay, especially the non-exit relay, encrypts the source and the destination IP addresses before it forwards the data onto the next Tor relay.  I do not know if Tor is going to encrypt the meat of the data (i.e., the whole enchilada of the content of the data) between the transit also, but it seems that this isn’t the case (please correct me on this if I’m wrong on this).  Anyhow, since the source and  destination IP addresses are going to be encrypted over and over again through each Tor relay, therefore even next in line Tor relay (i.e., the next Tor relay to be received your data from the previous Tor relay) can only know about a previous Tor relay’s IP address and not the source or the destination IP address.  To make things even more illusive, Tor client will always choose a different path within Tor network each time it requests or send data to a destination.  This makes the matter worse for whoever or whatever that tries to trace back to a source IP address.  I think software that specialize in analyzing web traffic might find Tor specifically unfriendly.

OK, we got the anonymizing part down, but why Tor isn’t so great in protecting privacy?  If I’ve not misunderstood from several online sources that I read on Tor, it seems to be that each Tor relay has the ability to read and log the transit data.  As the data reach a Tor exit relay, the data retain the original forms.  From here the data exit a Tor exit relay and entering third party ISP network (i.e., the Internet Service Provider which provides service to the destination — example, an ISP which provides bandwidth to a website that you’re visiting).  The third party ISP network has to be the one which passes on the data to the final destination (e.g., a website, an online service, a social network).  Since Tor relay isn’t actually encrypting the data, therefore each Tor relay is capable in reading and logging the source’s data.  This means privacy isn’t actually being protected by using Tor.

Nonetheless, many users can protect their privacy by using Tor!  How?  They only pass their data through encrypted protocol.  An example is that a user use Tor to browse the web, but he or she relies on HTTPS protocol to encrypt his or her web data.  So, in a way if a Tor user can encrypt his or her data before send the data onto Tor network (i.e., Tor relays), his or her privacy might be protected from prying eyes.

To really protect one’s privacy and using Tor the right way, Tor suggests users to use Tor Bundle Browser download.  The heavily configured, latest Firefox browser (i.e., heavily configured by Tor) which comes with Tor Bundle Browser download will always attempt to pass the data through an encrypted protocol (I might be wrong on this).  Also, Tor’s own heavily Firefox modified browser would not come with plugins that might reveal a user’s IP address, and it might actually block a user from installing such plugin in the first place (I might be wrong on this).

Can Tor be vulnerable to hack?  According to blog.torproject.org’s Rumors of Tor’s compromise are greatly exaggerated article, hackers might be able to hack into Tor relays (i.e., known Tor relays), and then somehow congest the not-so easy to hack Tor relays with some sophisticated hacks so the traffics/data of the congested Tor relays will have to go through the Tor relays that the hackers have hacked into.  This way, the hackers can actually log and read the data of the congested Tor relays since such data must go through the compromised Tor relays.  As how the article above has pointed out, it might take huge amount of computing resources to congest so many known Tor relays.  So, it might not be something that the average hackers may want to try.

It seems Tor can be used by all types of people.  Good people might want to use Tor to really protect their anonymity for good reasons, but bad people might want to use Tor for hiding their real identities so they can do very bad things.  Here is one example how bad people might use Tor to hide their real identities so their really nasty, dirty laundries won’t hang out in the open; they might use Tor for viewing child porn videos online.

Tor can be speeded up for most Tor users if there are many more Tor users who actually host their own Tor relays.  I suspect many more Tor users who only use Tor as client.  These folks simply want to hide their identities from whatever web destinations and various ISPs (e.g., watching Hulu videos that are not made viewing available for certain people who have their IP addresses belong to the countries that are being blocked by Hulu) .  Nonetheless, few Tor users go on hosting Tor relays out of their altruistic nature.

I might be wrong, but there are four ways a Tor user can set up his or her own Tor relay or relays.  The first way would be the hosting of Tor middle relays (also known as Tor non-exit relay).  Tor middle relays are somewhat safe to host, because the middle relays cannot appear as the source of the data.  On the other hand, when a Tor user hosts Tor exit relays, he or she might be liable for the misuses of their Tor exit relays by some random Tor users, because Tor exit relays will always appear as the source of the data.  One example of a misuse of Tor exit relays would be someone might use Tor exit relays to view child porn.  The third and the fourth types of Tor relays are Tor private and public bridges.  It seems to me that Tor private bridges are only made known to the people who might know each other personally, because Tor private bridges’ information would not be distributed openly.  On the other hand, the Tor public bridges are made known to Bridge Authority.  According to blog.torproject.org, Bridge Authority is a special relay which collects all bridges’ IP addresses that pass through it.  If I’m not wrong, int a nutshell, Tor private and public bridges help Tor users to circumvent the ISPs that are blocking Tor’s normal relays (i.e., Tor middle and exit relays), consequently allowing these users to use Tor normally.  Still, ISPs can also block known Tor public bridges, therefore Tor private bridges might be the best hope for Tor users who want to truly circumvent ISPs’ Tor blocking measure.

Using Tor is easy as downloading Tor Browser Bundle for Mac or Windows or Linux, extract the Tor Browser Bundle to a known location on the computer, and then go to this location to fire up Start Tor Browser (i.e., essentially a heavily modified latest version of Firefox browser).  You might also notice when you fire up Start Tor Browser, a control panel known as Vidalia would also pop up.  Vidalia control panel allows Tor users to configure how they want to use Tor.  From Vidalia control panel, Tor users can configure Tor to be just a client to hosting a Tor relay.  Some users might even configure Vidalia to have Tor hosts hidden services.  What are Tor hidden services and why some people might want to host them?  Well, Tor hidden services are just like any other normal computing/web related services, and these might be websites, game servers, and so on.  What makes Tor hidden services different than the rest is that Tor hidden services will not reveal the IP addresses of  the Tor users who host Tor hidden services.  This might appeal to some Tor users who want to get their services or messages out to the public but stay anonymous.

In conclusion, Tor is fascinating to me since it’s a tool that can be excellent in doing what it does best, that is to anonymize a user’s IP address.  Unfortunately, Tor cannot be used solely for protecting one’s privacy.  Therefore, many people encrypt their data before they pass such data onto Tor network so their privacy can be protected better.  Tor isn’t hacker-proof, because hackers might know how to congest Tor network and compromise known Tor relays to do their dirty deeds.  Few Tor users might have been using Tor for malicious purposes such as anonymizing them from persecution of child porn and the likes.  These users might make the many Tor users who use Tor for legitimate purposes look really bad in the eyes of non-Tor users.  Tor true fans might even go as far as to host a Tor relay, because setting up one is not that hard!  All in all, Tor is pretty nifty, crafty and useful, but it can also be malicious as well!

Sources:

• https://www.eff.org/torchallenge/what-is-tor/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)
• http://www.wired.com/print/politics/security
  /commentary/securitymatters/2007/09/security_matters_0920
• https://blog.torproject.org/blog/different-ways-use-bridge

Steve Jobs image - this is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below. Commons is a freely licensed media file repository.

According to Techradar’s Steve Jobs was ‘deceptive’ says FBI file article, the FBI has released Steve Jobs file, and so you can now either go read or download this file at vault.fbi.gov/steve-jobs/steve-jobs-part-01-of-01/view.  The file is around 3.9 MB which is huge for just being a PDF file (at least to me).  Anyhow, according to Techradar, Steve Jobs was under investigation by the FBI for he was considered to be nominated for a high profile government position which had something to do with George H.W. Bush’s administration (i.e., the White House).  Again, according to Techradar, FBI found Steve Jobs to be deceptive.

So, in a way if you had read Steve Jobs’ biography which was written by Walter Isaacson with the title “Steve Jobs,” you may as well want to read the FBI file on Steve Jobs to compare the two to see if there is any discrepancy.  Sure, it might not be necessary to do so, but if you’re interested in learning more on Steve Jobs, how the man was and still is being worshiped by so many in the tech industry, I guess digging into the FBI file on Steve Jobs might shed some more light on what you think you already know about the man himself.  You might also want to be diligent too on judging the man from the FBI file, because it might be that the FBI could not have been entirely correct, and the same would go for Steve Jobs’ biography.  Why?  In truth, nobody would probably know Steve Jobs better than himself, therefore you can only know what you’re being fed to read.

I find that it’s quite interesting to see Steve Jobs, just a man of building a tech giant, has been the talk of the town since he made his few first headlines back in the day.  Even though he is now rest in peace, the talk of the town apparently is still buzzing about him, still.  They talk of him as if they’re worshipping him, isn’t this quite fascinating?  Some even seeing him as a celebrity even though the man wasn’t a celebrity.  Yes, you might agree why he is being worshipped or being seen as a famous dead celebrity too, because you are willing to spend lot of money on his products still.  Nonetheless, I forgot who but someone had pointed out Bill Gates has done much more than Steve Jobs in term of making the world better and so Bill Gates should be the one to be worshipped of and not Steve Jobs.  This person probably was talking about how Bill & Melinda foundation has changed the world.  I believe, Bill & Melinda foundation was found by Bill Gates and his wife.  I have heard how Bill & Melinda foundation has been involved with projects that have huge positive impacts on the world such as allowing the children of the poorest nations to have access to much needed vaccines.

With Steve Jobs is no longer with us, his company is continuing making huge gains to which Amazon and other competitors are very much like to see Apple stumbles.  Just recently, Amazon has released a commercial to point out how expensive iPad has been.  The lady in the commercial said to the man, even with her Kindle which could be read in sunlight and the other two Kindle Fires put together would still be cheaper than the man’s iPad.  The man was embarrassed and asked her who would be sitting in the empty seat next to her, and she said it was her husband.  The commercial ended gradually as it showed the man left in embarrassment and the prices of the regular Kindle ($199) and Kindle Fires ($79) appeared to confirm what the lady in the commercial had said.

Source:  http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/apple/steve-jobs-was-deceptive-says-fbi-file-1062235?src=rss&attr=all

Source:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2012/02/07/the-new-spider-man-trailer-will-turn-you-into-a-true-believer/

Star Was The Old Republic Hovering Speeder Screenshot was taken in game by Vinh Nguyen using Fraps software and Pixelmator to crop.

Just like any average Joe, quantum levitation feels like magic and my inner child goes haywire in a positive and curious senses.  The video right after the break will show you that a crystal sapphire wafer (and I have never seen one in real life) would suspend and lock into various heights and angles in the midair, and the whole levitation phenomenon allowed this crystal sapphire wafer to float and fly in midair as if it was actually guided by some strange mechanism which we could not see with our naked eyes.  Apparently, as io9.com’s Quantum locking will blow your mind — but how does it work? article explains that it was the phenomenon of flux tubes which locked the wafer in midair and allowed it to be manipulated as if magic.

According to my understanding from reading the io9.com’s Quantum locking will blow your mind — but how does it work? article, flux tubes are possible in nature giving thanks to how electromagnetic field works.  I’m not having a good understanding of the nature of electromagnetic field at all, but as the name for the force field suggests, it has to be dealt with electricity and magnetic.  Apparently, if I’m not mistaken, Wikipedia’s Electromagnetic field article explains that this particular field is the whole part where electrical charges’ behaviors would dictate how sub-fields (i.e., electrical and magnetic forces) would behave.  So, moving electrical charges in whatever fashion which I might not clearly understand gives way to the production of magnetic force, and stationary electrical charges would give way to the production of electrical force.

Let end our digression on the subject and get back to our main course which is quantum levitation.  So, it turns out that when someone applies a thin coat of superconductor material, yttrium barium copper oxide, onto something similar to the super-conductive crystal sapphire wafer, the superconductor object’s electrical forces from within would repel against the magnetic forces from without with just enough force to not actually create a breaking away behavior where a super-conducive object would fling off and away from the magnetic counterpart entirely.

So we understand the not breaking away, repel, and floating in the midair parts, but what makes the super-conductive object to be locked in the midair at various heights and angles?  As io9.com’s Quantum locking will blow your mind — but how does it work? explains, without applying too much superconductor material onto a super-conductive object, a phenomenon known as flux tubes would come knocking, and so it’s possible to lock and maneuver the super-conductive object in the midair as how the video right after the break will show.  io9.com explains flux tubes work as the weak coat of superconductor material allows some magnetic forces to pierce the super-conductive object, allowing the magnetic forces to act somewhat as if threads of silk but unlike silk where the magnetic forces would have the ability to hold the super-conductive object in midair entirely on its own if I’m not mistaken.  To put this in another way, if I’m not entirely wrong, the flux tubes would not need to be strung to something else in order for it to hold and lock a super-conductive object in the midair; this  differs flux tubes phenomenon from how silk threads phenomenon works, because silk threads need to be stitched to fabrics in order for buttons and whatever fashionable ornaments to be attached to the fabrics.

Either directly under the YouTube’s Quantum Levitation video right after the break or in the comment section of the io9.com’s Quantum locking will blow your mind — but how does it work? article, some commenters suggested that it would be impracticable to try to implement quantum levitation for everyday applications.  They thought that the required efforts and resources that needed to be garnered in order for applying quantum levitation to something as hover speeders (i.e., how Star Wars The Old Republic video game has its floating motorbikes and car-like vehicles) would outweigh the benefits of having such technology in the first place.  On the contrary to the argument above, some other commenters suggested that the superconductor material would not need to be coated onto highways/roads and railroads, because magnetic would be used instead — leading to just enough amount of superconductor material to be coated onto vehicles.  Nonetheless, we might never know whether this would be less expensive in resources and efforts unless we dare to put this idea into practice.

Besides the engineering aspect, we might not be able to ignore the possible negative side effects of health if there will be any when humans subject themselves to be constantly surrounded by huge concentrations of magnetic forces.  I guess many more studies have to be done on how huge concentrations of magnetic forces would affect the environment and human health before anyone even dares to think about putting quantum levitation into practice on a massive scale such as turning roads and highways into magnetic pathways for levitational vehicles.  Anyhow, enough of my ranting, why don’t you check out the mind blowing quantum levitation video right after the break.

Sources:

• http://io9.com/5850729/quantum-locking-will-blow-your-mind–but-how-does-it-work
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field

Source:  http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/02/journalist-recovers-video-of-his-arrest-after-police-deleted-it.ars?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=
Feed%3A+arstechnica%2Findex+%28Ars+Technica+-+Featured+Content%29

Related articles

• Testing TSA Photo Policy At Miami International Airport Again (pixiq.com)
• Journalist recovers video of his arrest after police deleted it (arstechnica.com)
• A Tale of Two Occupy Movements: Oakland and Miami (theawl.com)
• Miami-Dade Cop Who Arrested Me Is A Media Spokesperson (pixiq.com)
• Deleted Facebook pics still available after three years in some cases (slashgear.com)
• Occupy Miami To Discuss Regrouping After “Peace City” Eviction (miami.cbslocal.com)
• If You See Something, Film Something (thepursuitofliberty.wordpress.com)
• Your Deleted Facebook Photos Still Aren’t Really Deleted (gizmodo.com.au)
• Your Deleted Facebook Photos Still Aren’t Really Deleted [Facebook] (gizmodo.com)
• Deleted Facebook Pictures May Still Lurk on the Internet [VIDEO] (mashable.com)
• 10 ways to think like a Digital First journalist by Steve Buttry (worldmediatrend.wordpress.com)
• jcstearns: Video of photojournalist Jerry Nelson being arrested… (shortformblog.tumblr.com)
• I Was Arrested Covering The Occupy Miami Evacuation (pixiq.com)
• ACLU Sues LA County Sheriff’s Department For Harassing Photographers (themoderatevoice.com)
• House Republicans Arrest Filmmaker of Gasland. What’s Next? Death Threats Against Journalists? (disquietreservations.blogspot.com)
• Another day, another idea to regulate the press – but this one won’t work (guardian.co.uk)
• Journalists face risks in wartime (journalistjan.wordpress.com)
• Create press watchdog with power to strike off journalists, says editor (telegraph.co.uk)
• Admission: Journalists are Liberals Not Interested in Facts and Truth (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Gunmen kill journalist in Somalia (cnn.com)

Image via Wikipedia

I’m not sure how Solve for X forum would be able to encourage and arrange the average folks who just happen to have brilliant ideas to come together and discuss the stuffs of fantasies that might just fly in real world, but as Steve Jobs’ Apple commercial “Think Different” has been promoting that the crazy ones might be just the kind of people that would positively change the world.  Solve for X is a project which Google has been working on.  Just now Google has released Solve for X’s website and videos.  The website is at wesolveforx.com.  The video right after the break introduces you to Google’s Solve for X project.

Perhaps, Google’s Solve for X might only reach out to the people who may have brilliant ideas to come together and promote what might change the world.  For an example, the X might be something down to earth as finding clean water for the poorest nations to something up in space as in starting a space voyage for humankind.  You never know!  Nonetheless, I don’t know for sure how different Solve for X might be if one compares it against TED.

I hope Solve for X would allow the average folks as your next door neighbor (or even yourself) to participate in the project somehow.  You never know someone out there, perhaps your next door neighbor or even yourself might just happen to have crazy idea that might change the world in a very big way!  Nonetheless, it seems Solve for X does include average folks in its equation somewhat as it allows you to post your own Solve for X talks using Google Plus.  In truth, I haven’t tried to do such a thing, therefore I don’t even know how one would be able to use Google Plus to start a Solve for X talk!  Do you?

Source:  http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/02/06/2237259/google-solve-for-x-website-goes-live?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign
=Feed%3A+Slashdot%2Fslashdot+%28Slashdot%29

Related articles

• Google’s mysterious lab surfacing in WeSolveForX? (digitaltrends.com)
• Google’s We Solve for X: a lecture series aimed at solving global problems (geek.com)
• Google Launching TED-Style Think Tank With ‘Solve For X’ (simplyzesty.com)
• Google ‘Solve For X’ Website Goes Live (tech.slashdot.org)
• Google Unveils New ‘Solve for X’ Project (techland.time.com)
• Google shooting for solving the impossible with its “Solve for X” project (inquisitr.com)
• Google Launches ‘Solve for X,’ Think Tank for Fixing Global Problems [VIDEO] (mashable.com)
• Solve for X: Google gathers top minds to solve everything (zdnet.com)
• Google Unveils ‘Secret Lab’ For Radical Ideas (informationweek.com)
• Google Forms ‘Solve For X’ Think Tank (myfoxphoenix.com)

Image via Wikipedia

Lawrence Krauss, Arizona State University physicist, published a new book with title “A Universe From Nothing.”  Although I haven’t yet read this particular book of his, but I watched a lecture of his through a YouTube video with the same title as his book, and I have to say it was rather fascinating; at times I could only understand half of the things he had said.  Anyhow, if you don’t mind few headache moments, you can watch Lawrence Krauss’s “A Universe From Nothing” lecture right after the break.

The title “A Universe From Nothing” which has been named for both of his book and his lecture which made readily available through a YouTube video in itself is quite mind boggling and fascinating.  Nonetheless, what I refer to is of philosophy and not of exact science which requires experimentation.  On the other hand, I think what Lawrence Krauss had inferred to why a universe from nothing might actually happen is probably backed by certain scientific formulas, experiments and proofs.  Regardless, I still have to wonder is it really that how our universe was formed?  That’s, from nothing that is really something!

Philosophically speaking (i.e., without any real experimentation and mathematical proof), if nothing is actually something, then we still have to wrestle with the idea that there might be a nothing that is actually nothing, and this actual nothing might have been existed before everything.  Another way to phrase this is to ask it in a question.  What is actually nothing?  So, in a sense it’s rather implausible to see a universe could be formed from actual nothing.  As how Lawrence Krauss lectured which you could watch in the YouTube video above, his nothing is something (i.e., matters) as it has a mysterious mass or energy or however he had explained, therefore it was possible for him to see a universe of ours in a current state.  Without this picture, even if the calculation of the eventual sum of all matters that made known to humankind (i.e., protons, neutrons, etc…)  – in total could not have come up with the scale of the universe in which we have witnessed (e.g., measured, weighed, computed) today.  So, his answer was what we thought of nothing is really something after all.

Still, the question which has always lingered in the back of my mind is the kind of nothing which Lawrence Krauss had spoken of might have been created by something in the first place.  In a way, it’s rather implausible if such a scenario is to be probed, not because it might not be possible to do an experiment to probe for such a scenario, although it’s probably impossible to do so with exactness, but it’s also about the philosophical aspect where we have to wonder perhaps the actual nothing might exist.  If the actual nothing isn’t existed in nature ever, it would be an infinite scenario where the nothing we’ve now knew as something, if we’ve believed Lawrence Krauss’s explanation, might always have been created by something, and there was and has been such an infinite pattern of nature.  In the end, it’s only a curiosity of mine, because I might not know what on earth I’m taking about — philosophical or not.

Source:  http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/story/2012-02-04/lawrence-krauss-universe/52951768/1?csp=34tech&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm
_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-TechTopStories+%28Tech+-+Top+Stories%29

Related articles

• Where Did The Universe Come From; Lawrence Krauss Will Tell You (iantimberlake.wordpress.com)
• Something from nothing? A conversation with Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins – ASU Origins Project – RDFRS (richarddawkins.net)
• Krauss finds something in nothing – Lawrence Krauss – asu news (richarddawkins.net)
• Review: A Universe From Nothing by Lawrence Krauss (doubtingeric.blogspot.com)
• Lawrence Krauss Writes ‘A Universe From Nothing’ (huffingtonpost.com)
• Afterword from Lawrence Krauss’ New Book – A Universe From Nothing – Richard Dawkins – RDFRS (richarddawkins.net)
• From Nothing to God? (theseventhapologist.wordpress.com)
• Lawrence Krauss On ‘A Universe From Nothing’ (npr.org)
• Everything and Nothing – An Interview with Lawrence Krauss – Sam Harris – The Sam Harris Blog (richarddawkins.net)
• Nothing is something (openparachute.wordpress.com)
• A Universe From Nothing – Review – Samantha Nelson – A.V. Club (richarddawkins.net)
• Richard Dawkins’s Afterword in Lawrence Krauss’s A Universe From Nothing (3quarksdaily.com)
• A Q&A with Physicist and Author Lawrence Krauss (blogs.smithsonianmag.com)

A Day Made of Glass (玻璃打造的未來生活) (Photo credit: Mr.850)

It was not hard to see why Forbes reported Corning’s “A Day Made Of Glass” first video had attracted at least 17 million views on YouTube.  It was a well made video which depicted a highly futuristic lifestyle evolved around glass.  According to Forbes, Corning, 160 year old glass company, wanted their customers and future prospects to the see the potential for applying highly engineered glass futuristically in daily lives.

Corning’s “A Day Made Of Glass” second video showed the potential of highly engineered glass to be expanded to schools, hospitals, and even parks.   So a wall of a school might suddenly be turned into interactive display by the application of glass, but at first look the wall might not resemble something that had been made by glass.  Some glass were engineered to be thin and plastic like, allowing children to effortlessly carrying them around for the purposes of computing, learning, playing games, and augmenting the reality.  Inside the hospitals, doctors would use glass to examine patient records and past illness history on site while patients might be under emergency care.

The futuristic scenarios that depicted people would constantly interact with glass to enhance their lives might not be too farfetched. As now we already have such capability in producing similar things.  Tablets and smartphones keep on getting smaller, thinner, and more powerful.  At CES 2012, Samsung revealed its smart transparent window which allowed passersby to check information on weather and close a virtual blind.  Check out Corning’s “A Day Made Of Glass” videos right after the break.

Source:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethwoyke/2012/02/03/corning-hopes-for-another-viral-hit-with-sequel-to-its-a-day-made-of-glass-video/

Related articles

• Design Fiction: A Day Made of Glass 2 (wired.com)
• Samsung Mobile Display to use Corning Lotus Glass with OLEDs (electronista.com)
• Corning and Samsung Mobile Display team for OLED glass partnership (slashgear.com)
• Samsung and Corning Mate OLED and Glass Businesses (phonescoop.com)
• Corning and Samsung ink new joint venture, plot Lotus Glass future for OLED devices (engadget.com)
• Corning Gorilla Glass 2 coming to CES 2012 (slashgear.com)
• Is Gorilla Glass on a smartphone really all that? (cnet.com)
• Is Gorilla Glass on a smartphone really all that? (cnet.com)
• Researchers Create Glass Just 3 Atoms Thick (science.slashdot.org)
• Corning And Samsung Form New OLED Glass Partnership (geeky-gadgets.com)
• Gorilla Glass (makezine.com)
• Architectural Technologist – Corning Glass – Gorilla Glass (konstrukshon.com)
• HTC Incredible (product-reviews.net)
• Corning Gorilla Glass 2 hands-on (video) (engadget.com)

Image via Wikipedia

Engadget’s Barnes & Noble to pull Amazon Publishing titles from shelves over exclusivity concerns article suggests Barnes & Noble has turned up the heat as the two go on competing each other for a book market domination.  Of course, Barnes & Noble is worrying that Amazon will eventually kick them out of their own game.  Meanwhile, Amazon continues to do the impossible even though Amazon is relatively new player in the book world when one compares Amazon against Barnes & Noble.  Seniority doesn’t secure a permanent establishment since we have seen how Borders had filed for bankruptcy from Chapter 11 which eventually turned into Chapter 7 (Source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borders_Group).  The argument which Barnes & Noble has against Amazon is clear to me, but might not be true since I’m not an expert in the operation of the book business, is that Amazon is too pushy in term of demanding for more exclusivity with various book publishers.  I have to wonder though, would this be a good thing for book publishers?

Why?  If book publishers can negotiate with particular distributors for exclusivity deal, it might in the end raising the value of the book publishers who go for exclusive deals since exclusivity means rarity.  We know most things that are rare might be more valuable, right?  What if we take a look at a much bigger picture, how would the book world fare if only big players such as Amazon would be able to acquire exclusivities from popular book publishing companies?  I’m not sure but I think with more exclusive deals go around the book world, book business might change even more than it’s already has.

The book world already has changed so much in term of how ebook technology has totally changed how consumers read their books, pushing more consumers only to buy ebooks and abandon their traditional books (i.e., books made of papers).  Exclusive deals within the book world might push the change further by having small book stores to go out of business.  These small book stores usually are local book stores.  Of course, the trend seems to head in this particular route anyway since ebook technology has made it so easy for consumers to buy books online.  It means people don’t really have to go to a local book store to buy their books.

To knit the fragments of the big picture together, in my opinion, the trend of pushing for exclusivity isn’t meant the death of book publishing, but it might be the new rise of book publishing.  If Barnes & Noble wants to beat Amazon in book publishing exclusivity trend, I think Barnes & Noble has to figure out how to offer the book publishing companies better deals than what Amazon is currently offering these book publishing companies.

Will the consumers be beneficial to book exclusivity trend?  Probably not in the long run, because I think once a giant book distributor has began to dominate the book exclusivity trend, such entity tends to raise the prices of the books since the competitors aren’t going to have such titles for sale anyway.  The outlook might not be good for book customers if the Amazon defeats Barnes & Noble in book exclusivity trend, because one less competitor will give one less reason for Amazon to sell ebooks at the cheapest prices as possible.  Of course, my speculation on this might not pan out the way I speculate at all, because I’m not an expert in book business anyway.  I guess you just have to take my words with a grain of salt!

Related articles

• Barnes & Noble Says It Won’t Sell Books Published by Amazon (mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Barnes & Noble Says It Won’t Sell Books Published by Amazon (mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Barnes & Noble won’t stock books by Amazon anymore (laobserved.com)
• The Barnes & Noble vs Amazon War Continues (selfpubauthors.wordpress.com)
• Barnes & Noble Declares Wimpy War On Amazon (gizmodo.com.au)
• Barnes & Noble Declares Wimpy War on Amazon Publishing [Books] (gizmodo.com)
• BookBaby Connects Indie Authors to Kobo and Copia (prweb.com)
• Barnes (csmonitor.com)
• Barnes & Noble won’t stock books published by Amazon (digitaltrends.com)
• Barnes & Noble shuns Amazon books (seattlepi.com)