The Internet of Cars: Wireless connections in cars are becoming faster and more capable, bringing new features, new service and new problems.
[reproduced from MIT Technology Review] [By Will Knight 07/10/13] Most new cars roll off the production line today with as many sensors, computer chips, and lines of code as you’d find in a trunk-load of smartphones. What’s more, thanks to deals between carmakers and wireless carriers, cars increasingly come with high-speed, always-on, wireless connectivity—setting up both new kinds of services and a higher potential for distraction and malfeasance. Today, the third-largest wireless carrier in the U.S., Sprint, announced a service that will let carmakers improve the sophistication of mobile apps that connect with a vehicle’s onboard computer system. Prototype apps developed for this new platform can send directions from a smartphone to a dashboard navigation system, adjust the air-conditioning system remotely so it’s cool before the driver gets in, or pinpoint a vehicle in a busy parking lot. The platform, called Sprint Velocity, uses protocols designed for machine-to-machine communications. The Sprint platform also uses software from IBM called MobileFirst to manage communications between a car’s systems and outside apps. Such technology could also let cars report conditions to the driver or to manufacturers more regularly. “You might, for example, get a reading off a car that indicates that the vehicle is slipping on ice,” says Michael Curry, vice president of applications integration middleware at IBM. “That might feed back to a central network, and when the car manufacturer realizes that car is slipping, they may say, ‘Do we have other cars in that area that might be impacted?’ and send a notification to those vehicles or maybe even automatically put those cars into winter mode.” Wireless connectivity has been creeping into cars since 1996, when GM introduced its OnStar service. It uses a cellular network to provide hands-free calling, navigation, and call-center support during emergencies, and can be used to disable a stolen car remotely. Lured by the prospect of selling recurring subscription fees, all major car manufacturers now offer similar services. Ford vehicles have a slightly different service, called Sync, which connects to a cell phone and uses its modem to connect to a cellular network.
0 Comments
3D printing: As additive manufacturing grows in popularity, companies will be producing products in an entirely different way. I’ve posted a few weeks ago about MarketBot’s revolutionizind prototyping and startup entrepreneurship, how about “Press a button and a pair of shoes that smell like bubble gum emerges, fully formed, from a 3D printer”. Sounds far-fetched? Tell that to Melissa’s Shoes, a Brazilian footwear company that recently “printed” its first pair of brightly colored, plastic sandals.¹ [Reproduced from Wall Street Journal] 3D Printing: Data, Data Everywhere [by Deloitte Insights | 07.09.13] How companies can take advantage of advanced data management capabilities to apply bold, new manufacturing techniques. Press a button and a pair of shoes that smell like bubble gum emerges, fully formed, from a 3D printer. Sound far-fetched? Tell that to Melissa’s Shoes, a Brazilian footwear company that recently “printed” its first pair of brightly colored, plastic sandals.¹ Organizations may soon deploy variations of 3D printing technologies to design and build everything from automobile parts to medical devices. “Think about a supertanker. The maintenance department won’t have to stock spare engine parts. If something breaks, they can print another one,” says Mike Brinker, a principal at Deloitte Consulting LLP who leads Deloitte Digital. “Or, it may soon be possible to extrude cement. Engineers could potentially set up huge 3D printers at a construction site to ‘print’ the foundation of a building.” “This is coming,” says Mark Cotteleer, a director with Deloitte Services LP. “In the next 5 to 10 years, 3D printing technology will proliferate.” Though the market for 3D printing—also known as additive manufacturing—is currently estimated at just 0.02 percent of global manufacturing output, its potential for lowering manufacturing costs and revitalizing America’s industrial base is vast and largely untapped. Consensus estimates for the market opportunity of additive manufacturing, according to a poll of industry experts by Wohlers Associates in 2011, exceed $21 billion with estimates as high as $170 billion.² This technology could have a profound effect not only on a company’s design and manufacturing processes, but also on the supportive role that IT will be called upon to play in those processes. “As they begin to engage in additive manufacturing, companies will implement advanced design technologies, along with numerous computing tools to run simulations and to test and track the quality and durability of products,” says Cotteleer. “Vast amounts of data will typically be required to operate these tools and support critical additive manufacturing processes.” Cotteleer says there is a sizable gap between many companies’ tools and talent, and that which they will need to engage in additive manufacturing. “CIOs will have to make significant investments in manufacturing execution systems, data management, and other technologies required to support an additive manufacturing environment,” he says. Neck Deep in Data 3D printers use a process similar to that found in inkjet printing (see Figure 1). But instead of depositing ink on a page, they deposit materials such as plastics, polymers, and metals in successive layers to create a physical object. According to Cotteleer, printing is the culmination of a data-heavy design process in which 3D software is used to digitally model a product, and simulation technologies are deployed to qualify, or test, the product materials. This design process differs depending on the technologies being deployed, the product design, and other factors, but typically it involves two fundamental steps: Technological progress is eliminating the need for many types of jobs and leaving the typical worker worse off than before. That is one of the dirty secrets of economics: We used to say “if we took care of productivity, everything else would take care of itself; it was the single most important economic statistic”. But that’s no longer true: today, technology progress does grow the economy and creates wealth, but there is no economic law that says everyone will benefit. [Reproduced from MIT Technology Review] How Technology Is Destroying Jobs [By David Rotman | 06.12.13] Given his calm and reasoned academic demeanor, it is easy to miss just how provocative Erik Brynjolfsson’s contention really is. Brynjolfsson, a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, and his collaborator and coauthor Andrew McAfee have been arguing for the last year and a half that impressive advances in computer technology—from improved industrial robotics to automated translation services—are largely behind the sluggish employment growth of the last 10 to 15 years. Even more ominous for workers, the MIT academics foresee dismal prospects for many types of jobs as these powerful new technologies are increasingly adopted not only in manufacturing, clerical, and retail work but in professions such as law, financial services, education, and medicine. That robots, automation, and software can replace people might seem obvious to anyone who’s worked in automotive manufacturing or as a travel agent. But Brynjolfsson and McAfee’s claim is more troubling and controversial. They believe that rapid technological change has been destroying jobs faster than it is creating them, contributing to the stagnation of median income and the growth of inequality in the United States. And, they suspect, something similar is happening in other technologically advanced countries. Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence, according to Brynjolfsson, is a chart that only an economist could love. In economics, productivity—the amount of economic value created for a given unit of input, such as an hour of labor—is a crucial indicator of growth and wealth creation. It is a measure of progress. On the chart Brynjolfsson likes to show, separate lines represent productivity and total employment in the United States. For years after World War II, the two lines closely tracked each other, with increases in jobs corresponding to increases in productivity. The pattern is clear: as businesses generated more value from their workers, the country as a whole became richer, which fueled more economic activity and created even more jobs. Then, beginning in 2000, the lines diverge; productivity continues to rise robustly, but employment suddenly wilts. By 2011, a significant gap appears between the two lines, showing economic growth with no parallel increase in job creation. Brynjolfsson and McAfee call it the “great decoupling.” And Brynjolfsson says he is confident that technology is behind both the healthy growth in productivity and the weak growth in jobs. It’s a startling assertion because it threatens the faith that many economists place in technological progress. Brynjolfsson and McAfee still believe that technology boosts productivity and makes societies wealthier, but they think that it can also have a dark side: technological progress is eliminating the need for many types of jobs and leaving the typical worker worse off than before. Brynjolfsson can point to a second chart indicating that median income is failing to rise even as the gross domestic product soars. “It’s the great paradox of our era,” he says. “Productivity is at record levels, innovation has never been faster, and yet at the same time, we have a falling median income and we have fewer jobs. People are falling behind because technology is advancing so fast and our skills and organizations aren’t keeping up.” Brynjolfsson and McAfee are not Luddites. Indeed, they are sometimes accused of being too optimistic about the extent and speed of recent digital advances. Brynjolfsson says they began writing Race Against the Machine, the 2011 book in which they laid out much of their argument, because they wanted to explain the economic benefits of these new technologies (Brynjolfsson spent much of the 1990s sniffing out evidence that information technology was boosting rates of productivity). But it became clear to them that the same technologies making many jobs safer, easier, and more productive were also reducing the demand for many types of human workers. |
head of product in colorado. travel 🚀 work 🌵 food 🍔 rocky mountains, tech and dogs 🐾Categories
All
|