MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.--While I'm sure that many of the people in the room were familiar with prediction markets, I wonder how many of them had ever seen an active one up close and personal before.
Providing that sense of deep immersion, of course, was exactly the point of an exercise run Monday during a session of Singularity University's executive program by Melanie Swan, a Silicon Valley hedge fund manager. Swan, the principal of MS Futures Group, had tasked small groups of students with coming up with world-changing product ideas and then simultaneously had the students vote in an online prediction market looking at which product and team would be rewarded with the most faux-venture capital.
Despite the fact that some technical problems got in the way, the point was made: prediction markets, given enough active participation, are increasingly seen as an excellent way to arrive at the answers to any number of questions, whether it's sales figures, who will win presidential elections, or who will get the most VC funding. Indeed, the winning technology concept--a pill that could cure cancer--and team were accurately prognosticated by the market.
For the group of superstar achievers like the students in the executive program, this was but one piece of a meticulously constructed nine-day education that many hope will supplement and enhance already successful careers in a wide range of disciplines.
Other sessions included looks at the state-of-the-art in medical research from Daniel Kraft, an instructor in Stanford's cancer/stem cell biology institute, and Chris deCharms, the founder of Omneuron, a company working on new MRI technologies; future forecasting from Peter Bishop, the coordinator of the futures studies program at the University of Houston; a workshop in the future of medicine and biomedical technology from Stanford developmental biotechnology professor, Stuart Kim; and a talk by Harvard Law School professor and Internet law expert Johnathan Zittrain.
And that was all just on Monday.
Four start-ups emerged
Earlier this year, Singularity University (SU) ran its inaugural summer session, a nine-week program based at NASA's Ames Research Center here in the heart of Silicon Valley, aimed at giving the best 40 of more than 1,200 applicants a highly concentrated education in a series of exponentially growing technologies like biotechnology and bioinformatics; nanotechnology; AI, robotics, and cognitive computing.
For those students, who were chosen based on having demonstrated top-level academic rigor, entrepreneurial and leadership skills, an interest in global issues and who were seen as already being at the top of their chosen fields, the nine weeks were a marathon of long days and nights of lectures from world-leading thinkers, workshops in the technologies that could shape the future and group projects centered on coming up with ways to positively impact a billion people. Already, four start-ups have emerged from the summer session.
But now the first of SU's nine-day executive program is in full swing, and according to co-founder, X Prize Chairman and CEO Peter Diamandis, the goal now is to distill the best parts of the nine-week SU version and present them to the new students in a way that will be of the most use to them.
"The executive program is really focused on providing the information in a much more organized and digestible fashion for executives, addressing the issue of what's in the lab today and where is this going in five years," said Diamandis (see video below). "What is the key terminology that (the students) should know about these fields, what are the top ten breakthrough milestones that you should be watching out for, and, ultimately, how are these breakthroughs going to affect you, your company and your industry."
That's obviously a very ambitious mission statement, but for many of the 20 people lucky enough to be taking part in the executive program, Diamandis and his fellow organizers have succeeded in pulling together something very worthwhile, even as it is one of the most intense experiences of their lives.
"It's like taking medical school and boiling down four years into about four days," said Michael Gillam, a physician who runs the health care innovation lab at Microsoft. "That will give you a sense of the sort of depth of the material" covered during the executive session.
From the beginning, SU's founders--futurist and "The Singuality is Near" author Ray Kurzweil; Diamandis; and ex-Yahoo Brickhouse head Salim Ismail--had planned on the institution offering both the longer summer sessions and shorter, three- and nine-day executive programs. In the process of actually putting them together, though, Ismail said, the three-day version got scrapped for simply being too short.
Instead, the executive program's first group of students--20 people of varying ages and professions, half of whom are American and half international--arrived at Ames on Friday having paid the $15,000 fee, each in search of something a little bit different.
Sole focus is on tomorrow
For Gillam, the rationale for taking nine days off from work--he said he'd come on vacation from Microsoft since it would have been impossible to take part in the summer session--was crystal clear: to get a deep dive in the technologies that are coming screaming down the line at us.
"You can go almost anywhere today and hear about historical trends (or a) deep analysis of today," Gillam said. "But there's virtually no place where the sole focus is on tomorrow, and where we are going. That was extremely intriguing and what captured my attention."
For Peter Platzer, a currencies and commodities trader from New York, attending SU was all about having meaningful interactions with the diverse and accomplished group of faculty and staff and to get a better understanding of the kinds of exponential technologies that are being discussed there.
And according to organizers, some of the students, whose numbers include venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, CEOs, and government representatives, even came solely for the chance to meet, and potentially invest with, members of the start-ups that came out of the summer session.
Alumni network
Those potential relationships are possible because one of the things that's already developing at SU is a strong alumni network. That's evident at the executive program in the group of summer session graduates who have returned as faculty assistants--who also happen to be able to sit in on all the deliberations and discussions--and in the number of faculty who themselves have come back for more.
Diamandis said that there's no doubt that SU is fostering an ongoing network that is sure to benefit all who join. For example, he suggested that if, in the future, a graduate wanted to find someone who was a European robotics expert, they would likely be able to find such a person in the SU program. Because the executive program will be repeated in February and again in April, and the nine-week program next summer, there will only be more members of the network as time passes.
And as proof that SU graduates take their membership in that network seriously, Ismail pointed out that though it's only been two months since the summer students graduated, they'd already had a reunion.
To faculty member Dan Barry, a former NASA astronaut--and cast member of CNET News parent company CBS' "Survivor"--the main difference between the summer session students and those in the executive program is that while the former tended to be very smart people at crossroads in their lives and careers, the latter are very established in their respective businesses and are seeing how they can become aware of, and perhaps utilize, the future technologies being discussed.
Still, Barry said he sees more similarities than differences between the two groups. Both, he said, are "interested in technology and the future and are concerned about the state of the planet and the people on it."
For Barry, taking part as part of the faculty has been a refreshing change of course that, thanks to the "potential and excitement (I see) reflected in their eyes," has re-energized him professionally.
"When I talk with other astronauts...about space, we tend to talk about technical things," Barry said. "When I talk (to the students) it helps me to remember...what's spectacular about going to space."
This photo of U2 lead singer Bono, shot during U2's Rose Bowl show on October 25, by amateur photographer Bruce Heavin, was taken with a Canon PowerShot G11, and is representative of the high-quality pictures that ticket-holders can easily take these days at concerts and other events with point-and-shoot cameras. Note the people in the picture snapping their own images of Bono.
(Credit: Flickr user Bruce Heavin)At last month's huge U2 show at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., how could you tell the difference between the professional photographers and your average amateurs?
Answer: the professionals were the ones whisked away after Bono and friends finished their third song, and the amateurs were still there, happily shooting to their heart's content.
Nearly every person at any show these days is going to have some form of camera with them, be it a point-and-shoot, an iPhone or some other camera phone, and it seems that there is almost no way to imagine keeping all those devices out.
That new reality is forcing an increasing number of bands to come to grips with the fact that they can't really control the images from their shows, and that, for the most part, they're better off letting fans cram Facebook and Flickr with such pictures anyway.
"It's an acknowledgment of the way technology is changing, and how much digital cameras have become a part of our lives," Rob Sheridan, the creative director for Nine Inch Nails, told CNET News. "Now that everyone has video and still cameras in their phones, and pocket digital cameras take HD video and great quality pictures, not only is it impossible to keep cameras out of shows, but it's fighting an increasingly uphill battle against what is now a cultural norm: people freely documenting their lives and the things they do to share it with friends and family."
In fact, the only people who may emerge frustrated from this new paradigm are the professionals. For those shooting with credentials, the phrase is "three songs and you're gone," said Bob Carey, the president of the National Press Photographers Association, meaning that pros are generally allowed to shoot from a designated "pit" near the stage during a band's first three songs, and then they have to leave.
Last month, I was one of those sporting a photo pass at the 96,000-fan U2 Rose Bowl show. And even as I was clicking away during those first three songs, I was acutely aware that there were hundreds of people even closer to the stage than I was, toting cameras capable of taking some pretty great pictures. Indeed, a quick Flickr search confirmed just that.
Little dynamos
Many of those fans--and thousands more throughout the Rose Bowl that night--were shooting with nothing more than a camera phone. And no one worries about the dissemination of images taken with devices like that. But some people were shooting with cameras like Canon's new PowerShot G11, a little 12.5-ounce, 10-megapixel dynamo much more than capable of producing professional images.
Shot with a press credential from the photo pit and with a digital SLR, this CNET photo is not all that distinguishable from the photo (seen above) by amateur Bruce Heavin, which he took with a Canon PowerShot G11, a point-and-shoot camera.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)So, while the professionals are being ushered out after those three songs, how is it that the fans are able to keep shooting?
The answer is camera policies in effect at concerts, which are almost always defined by the bands themselves. And conversations with people throughout the music industry make it clear that while there are no standard policies, and that the rules run the gamut from "anything goes" to "no pictures, please," artists today are increasingly tolerant, even encouraging, of fans taking all the pictures they want.
Look, for example, at the Nine Inch Nails Web site, which spells out the band's open camera policy, "inviting fans to capture the events with anything from a cell phone to a hi-def video camera." The reason is clear: "The results have been overwhelming, filling our own galleries with thousands of images and videos from every show, and inspiring a number of ambitious fan-sourced video projects within the NIN community. Some of those projects are starting to surface now, and we couldn't be happier with the way the fans have organized themselves and created some truly impressive work."
Further, Sheridan told CNET News, even the proliferation of pictures of the band's shows taken by fans hasn't hurt its commercial interests.
"Despite the fact that our fans take thousands and thousands of their own photos at each NIN show with whatever camera they'd like, we still sell prints of live photos taken by me through a Web site called frcphotos.com," said Sheridan. "This is presumably the type of thing that other acts would be trying to 'protect' by limiting photography at shows, but we've found that fans are still eager to purchase reasonably-priced professional prints, often taken at angles or distances that only someone working for the band would have access to."
Some artists are clearly concerned about fans' rights to take pictures, and go so far as to issue reminders when there are restrictions. For example, the indie rock due, Tegan and Sara, have sent tweets saying things like, "Hollywood Bowl restricts cameras that are deemed professional. This usually means cameras with a removable lens. So keep that in mind!!!"
And, of course, other rock stars are not at all behind the notion of fans taking pictures. Among those are said to be Prince, Kanye West, Bjork, and others. At shows by those artists, security is known to assiduously stop people from taking pictures of any kind, even with camera phones, though one wonders just how effective such policies can be.
Less anti-camera attitudes
But clearly, anti-camera attitudes are becoming less and less prevalent these days.
"It's something that artists have come to realize they have no control over," said Abe Baruck, a manager who works with big-name acts like Journey, Clint Black, and Peter Wolf. It's "more a realization that this is just the way people enjoy entertainment. They want to capture something for their own nostalgia (and it) just doesn't go anywhere other than for their own use."
That thinking is likely what is behind the restrictions on specific kinds of camera equipment at some shows, like U2's, and on professionals.
Even though millions of amateur photographers now own digital SLRs, there is still a mindset in the entertainment industry that anyone toting one at a concert is a professional and therefore should be limited in where and how they shoot.
That's why some bands, like U2, make a point of allowing fans to take pictures, so long as they stick to lower-end equipment. "Since 2001, U2 has openly allowed fans to bring cameras to their shows," reads the FAQ on the site U2tours.com. "Your camera, however, must be a point-and-shoot camera; DSLRs are not allowed."
"It's just a very simple calling card saying, 'I'm a professional media person,'" Philip Blaine, a producer with Coachella promoter Goldenvoice, said of photographers with digital SLRs, "'and I know how to utilize this media in a professional manner.'"
And while it's generally bands that are setting camera policies, some venues have also asserted control over what fans can and can't bring.
One example is the Hollywood Bowl, in Los Angeles. As evidenced by the tweet from Tegan and Sara, that venue imposes restrictions around certain kinds of equipment. A Hollywood Bowl spokeswoman said that that venue won't let ticket-holders bring in professional-grade equipment.
Professional sports seem to largely work the same way. According to NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy, football fans are allowed to bring in any kind of still camera--though lenses are restricted to less than six inches long, for security reasons--they want. That policy is standard across the entire NFL, McCarthy added, and prohibits fans from bringing in any kind of camcorder.
The same basic policy applies to other sports, too. According to Nick Ohayre, a spokesperson for the NBA's Golden State Warriors, fans are free to carry and use cameras at basketball games, so long as they don't use flash and don't bring large, professional equipment.
But over time, as the technology improves, it may become more common and force sports leagues and entertainers to pay more attention to what's happening with imagery taken by the thousands of small devices fans bring with them to events, especially as the quality of pictures from those devices is often good enough for professional publication and licensing.
Some even think that band representatives need to do a better job of keeping up with what's possible in technology.
"I don't think they're aware of some of (what's possible) with new devices," said Carey of the National Press Photographers Association. "I don't think they've figured out the nuances of what point-and-shoots can do with photos and video."
But the increasing permissive attitude toward letting fans shoot whatever photos they please may simply come down to the realities of what it would take to do a serious search of every one of the thousands of people who go through an event's gates.
In the old days, said New York freelancer Lia Bulaong, if she wanted to sneak a camera into a show, she would hide its battery in her bra and then convince security she had brought her powerless camera into the show in order not to risk it being stolen from her car.
But in the last two or three years, she said, such subterfuge is pointless.
"No-camera policies just became extra ridiculous because pretty much everyone has a camera in their phone," Bulaong said. "Venues can't turn away camera phones and will never the capacity to check them in like they do coats and bags."
Plus, she pointed out, more and more, the bands want to incorporate the fans' phones into their shows.
"The one thing you will see at every concert now, regardless of the artist, is the moment when everyone has their camera phone out and the venue is awash in tiny lit up screens."
In a world in which Disney defines its brand and the content it releases under its own name as being aimed at the broadest possible audience, Mickey Mouse is known largely as a feel-good, happy-go-lucky cartoon character.
But that's not how Mickey was in the early days. Back in 1928, when he first hit the world stage, he was a very badly behaved mouse. And now, one of the best-known video game designers in the world wants to bring back a little of bit of Mickey's dark side.
And he'll get his chance to make that a reality. Warren Spector, the game designer behind the Deus Ex franchise, is working on a new game, Disney's Epic Mickey, which is being positioned, in part, as a "re-imagining" of Mickey Mouse.
Planned for a fall 2010 release, Disney's Epic Mickey will be an adventure-platforming game exclusively for Nintendo's Wii. The story is built around a world--crafted by the sorcerer from The Sorcerer's Apprentice--in which a series of forgotten Disney creations live, and thrive. Among those characters is Oswald, Walt Disney's earliest cartoon star. As the years pass and Oswald becomes bitter at Mickey's success, Mickey inadvertently destroys Oswald's comfort zone in the cartoon wasteland and he must face the consequences of what he has accidentally wrought.
"It's a game where we remind (people) that Mickey is a hero who solves problems by dynamically changing the world around him and deciding how to interact with the people and places and problems he encounters in this strange new world," Spector said.
In 2005, Spector formed a start-up, Junction Point, which Disney bought when it commissioned him to work on the Mickey Mouse game. "I've wanted to work for Disney forever," he said, "so that was not a stumbling point for me at all."
And because Spector is a lifelong Disney fan and animation "freak," everything came together in 2007 for him and his Junction Point team to take on perhaps the best-known cartoon character of all time. On Tuesday, Spector talked with CNET News about the project.
Q: How did you get involved?
Warren Spector: I was out pitching a near-future science-fiction game and an enormous epic fantasy role playing game, and my agent suggested we talk to Disney. They turned things around and asked me if I wanted to a Mickey Mouse game, and I told them no, because I don't do kids games and Mickey's been kind of a kid property for a long time. But they said, No, no, we want someone to bring Mickey to a gaming audience in a whole new way and make him a hero for the 21st century. Pretty much at that point, I was in.
What was it like to get a chance to re-imagine Mickey Mouse?
Spector: How often do you get a chance to work with the most recognizable movie star character property on Earth? That's an opportunity most people never get. There was pretty much no way I could say no. Mickey touches everybody, and none of us will ever meet a human being who doesn't know about this character.
What's the best-case outcome for this game, in your fantasy?
Spector: The best case is to change the way people think about Mickey Mouse. He's not just your 8-year-old kid's best buddy, or a character who teaches infants colors on Mickey's Clubhouse. He's a hero again. In his early days, he appealed to every body. From 1928 to the mid-1930s, moviegoers around the world, everybody, men, women, old, young, you name it. Everybody loved Mickey. And the opportunity to bring him back to that place, where he's not just an icon on a watch or a T-shirt, but is actually a character that people care about in a narrative context, or want to be, to look up to as a character whose skin they want to inhabit for awhile, Boy, I can't think of a better (challenge) for someone who tells stories and makes games for a living.
The logo for Disney's Epic Mickey.
(Credit: Disney Interactive Studios)
Why does Mickey need re-imagining? And why now?
Spector: There's these characters, like Mario and Link (from the Zelda games) and Sonic, and I don't know if it's true, but you've got to believe that those characters--who are three heads tall and cute and iconic--at some level were inspired by Mickey Mouse. So why shouldn't Mickey be at the top of the gaming heap? Mickey deserves to be at the top of the game hero pyramid.
What are some of the things you're doing to make this new Mickey recognizable for everyone?
Spector: I came into this with a pretty good idea of who Mickey was. I wanted to remind Mickey that it's okay to be mischievous and badly-behaved. For so many years, he hasn't been allowed to do anything remotely mischievous. But if you go back to those early cartoons, he was very badly behaved, and we've got to let him get back to that. And in his early cartoons, he was very cartoon-y, he squashed, he stretched. He could remove his tail and use it as a sword. That was the second thing. And the third leap was mischievous cartoon character made of paint. So we talked about what we could do if we gave Mickey control over the stuff that he's made of and let him paint and then use paint thinner to remove stuff.
Were there other things that were essential for bringing Mickey to this medium?
Spector: One major challenge was finding a look for him, especially a 3D look. With a couple of rare exceptions, Mickey's always been in 2D and the animators cheated all the time, with the way his ears work and the way his nose fits relative to the rest of his face. In 3D you can't do that, so I looked at the few previous 3D Mickeys and I didn't feel anybody had gotten it right. We went through probably thousands of concepts trying to find the right look.There are a lot of people at Disney who care a lot about Mickey Mouse, and so getting a look that people could get behind was tough. Rendering it in 3D was tough and then getting it to move like a cartoon character was a huge challenge and tons of fun, and you'll tell me if we succeeded.
Warren Spector, lead designer on Epic Mickey.
(Credit: Disney Interactive Studios)
How much control did you have and how much control Disney assert?
Spector: I was really worried about that when I first started on this. There are lines you don't cross with Mickey Mouse, OK? But the thing that surprised me was how far out those lines were and how obvious it is where the lines really are.
There are people who say, 'Oh, give Mickey a big knife and put a gun in his hand, and then I'll like him.' Well, come on, nobody's going to do that. And you're not going to make Mickey evil, you know? And when you have an icon, where any combination of three circles defines Mickey Mouse for most people on the planet, you're not going to make his head square. I'd say it was a pretty easily negotiated deal, creatively.
Talk more about where the story idea came from?
Spector: During a meeting with the Disney guys, they showed us a PowerPoint with the concept of cartoon wasteland, a world of rejected and forgotten Disney creativity. And the foundation was making Mickey relevant to a gaming audience and a modern audience. It was funny because I watched this presentation thinking, Holy Cow, this is phenomenal and the seed of an amazing thing. And then all the execs were saying, Oh, you don't have to use any of that, this is just our think tank's concept. And I'm sitting there, going, Are you guys crazy. That's a great idea. Why would I not use all of that? I just thought it was so funny because they were trying so hard to make it clear that I had all this creative freedom, and I was like, No, I don't want it, I want this as my starting point.
Can you tell me something about working with these famous Disney characters that would surprise us?
Spector: I think the thing that surprised me the most is how easy it is to get these characters almost right. It's like, drawing Mickey or any other character in the Disney archives, they are so well known and defined and recognized and have such strong personalities that getting them 90 percent right is very easy. But that last 10 percent that just nails them, that's really, really hard. And that goes for how they look, and how they act and how they move, which is one of the reasons why I was so proud of my animators. I didn't tell them to do this. They came up with this idea on their own, of going back to the old cartoons, and rotoscoping them. They took the old cartoons and took our model and rig and then duplicated classic 2D animation, and composited our guy into classic Disney 2D cartoons. When you couldn't tell if it was our model or the original 2D animation, that was when I knew we had it.
Why only the Wii?
Spector: At the beginning, it was supposed to be on all platforms. I remember vividly how nervous I was about that. The idea was we were going to do a Wii port and I was never comfortable with that because the Wii really deserves its own design, something that takes advantage of what the Wii does best. We were talking about this one day and (Disney Interactive Studios executive vice president) Graham Hopper basically said, What does it take to ensure quality? I said, you can never guarantee greatness, but you need enough time and money to be competitive and it helps if you can focus. A single platform would be great. And it was an easy step from there to, Hey, we should do a Wii exclusive.
What about the Wii "stalling?" Does that worry you at all?
Spector: Yes and no. I've been doing this for 20 years, and I've had this saying, That I just need to sell one more copy of a game than is necessary to get my publisher to fund my next one. So I'm looking at this as, I've got a responsibility to Mickey Mouse and to Disney, and if I do something really good, commercial success will follow. I've got to believe that. And once you start talking about painting, people's hands (on the Wii) just immediately start moving as if they're holding a brush. It just totally works. I think we're on the right platform.
Google Voice may not have made it onto the iPhone yet, but the service has still managed to attract more than 1.4 million users.
In a story posted Friday, BusinessWeek is reporting that Google Voice has grown to 1.419 million users, 40 percent--fully 570,000--of whom use the service every day. The information comes from documents in which Google responded to questions from U.S. regulators interested in whether the search giant is improperly blocking calls to phone numbers in specific rural areas of the country.
But while the information about the number of users of the service was included in the documents Google handed over, they were not meant to be made public.
"Though the number of Google Voice customers was redacted in the version that was made public, BusinessWeek reviewed the information in the redacted sections," BusinessWeek reporter Arik Hesseldahl wrote. "'We had intended to keep sensitive information regarding our partners and the number of Google Voice users confidential,' Google said in a statement to BusinessWeek. 'Unfortunately, the PDF submitted to the (U.S. Federal Communications Commission) was improperly formatted.'"
Hessedahl added that subsequently, the FCC has replaced the first letter on its site with one in which the information originally intended to be redacted has been blacked out.
He also reported that another since-redacted section of the documents suggests that Google intends to take its Voice service global and has inked deals with several "international service providers for inputs to Google Voice." However, Google said that no such international services have gotten off the ground so far.
That Google should screw up something so simple as PDF formatting is terrific, from a reporter's perspective. Surely however, its investors, board members, and executives are none too happy with the employee responsible for ensuring that the relevant passages of the documents were blacked out. But, as someone who may not have been too successful at such an operation myself, I shouldn't throw stones.
And in the spectrum of corporate secrets it would have liked to keep to itself, the number of Google Voice users is kind of small potatoes. Somewhere, Larry and Sergey are probably breathing a sigh of relief that that's all that escaped the faulty digital black-out.
So, word to the wise, corporate types: if you have to give the government documents that are going to be made public, pay a little more attention to the way you format your PDFs. A lot could hang in the balance.
People always talk about dog years, or cat years, but what about video game console years?
It's hard to know what that math is, but one thing is certain: Sony's PlayStation 2 turned 9 years old Wednesday, and it sure feels like the best-selling video game console of all time has been around a whole lot longer than that.
Yet even though we're already more than three years into the PlayStation 3/Xbox 360/Wii console generation, the PS2 is still going strong. Routinely, month after month, its sales are in six figures--146,000 in September in the United States alone, according to The NPD Group--and there's no reason to think the 485 (and counting) developers who have made games for the platform are going to stop any time soon.
The PS2 turned 9 on Wednesday. What's that in video game years, if dog and cat years are equal to 7 human years?
(Credit: Sony)In large part, that's because there are millions of people for whom the world-beating processing power of the PS3 and the Xbox 360, and the graphics-so-good-you-can-see-beads-of-sweat-on-sports-players'-bodies aren't worth paying several hundred dollars for. For $100, they say, you can get one heck of a good video game playing experience with a PS2.
It "still holds a place in my heart--there's so many great games with huge amounts of replay value," said Michael Steavenson, a public relations professional who bought his PS2 around 2001. "I'm not so interested in blazingly fast processing speeds, graphics that make games look like a movie, or uber-cutting-edge hardware stats. If the game is well-designed, fun to play, and provides me with a good emotional connection, I'll play it forever."
According to Sony, one out of every three U.S. households owns a PS2, and, worldwide, almost 140 million people have one. To date, Americans have bought more than half a billion PS2 games, and all told, nearly 10,000 titles have been released for the platform. Not bad for a machine that has earned the right to be living out its golden years sitting on a porch somewhere, smoking a cigar and grumbling about kids these days.
... Read more
The Edge and Bono perform before 96,000 fans during the U2 360 concert Sunday at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)
PASADENA, Calif.--If you were one of the 96,000 people packed into the Rose Bowl Sunday night for the U2 concert--said to be the largest concert ever held here--you were sharing the experience with at least a few other fans off-site.
There's no way to know yet how many exactly, but it's safe to say millions of people around the world were also watching the concert live on YouTube, a potentially server-crashing Webcast that may have been the biggest live-stream yet.
For months, the band has been on tour with its U2 360 concerts. And to top off the grand claims, it has been called the biggest rock tour in history, at least as measured by the size and cost of its infrastructure--more than $750,000 per show, according to Rolling Stone.
Only days ago, the band announced that it would share the Rose Bowl concert live, with fans across the globe. Just before the band came on stage, a roadie calling himself Rocco got up in front of the crowd of 96,000 and said, "Tonight, you are the ones making history," shouting out that those in attendance would be joined by viewers in "North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia, and Antarctica."
For its part, YouTube wasn't sharing much about how it put together the live stream. Before the show started, there was some discussion among reporters on hand at the Rose Bowl about whether YouTube would be up to the task of delivering the show to so many people, live, on so many continents. But if Twitter is any judge, the live-stream went off almost without a hitch. More to the point, a Twitter feed set up on the official YouTube U2 page showcased comments in a wide variety of languages from Webcast viewers.
Back at the Rose Bowl, in an effort to rally the capacity crowd, the concert-goers were told why this show was chosen by YouTube: "Because right here is where the greatest singers of U2 songs are....Tonight, we need to hear your voices, and to hear you sing. Can you do it?"
In response, the crowd roared its agreement, and indeed, throughout U2's approximately two hours on stage, there were several emotional moments when U2 leader Bono stopped singing and let the audience take over the vocals. These were truly beautiful and awe-inspiring moments, as there is very little on Earth like the sound of nearly 100,000 people singing together.
Ironically, no connectivity
These days, you can find out what's happening at just about any event by turning to Twitter. But at the Rose Bowl, this wasn't the case. It turned out that there was nearly no connectivity, and so there seemed to be a dearth of tweets sent from inside the concert. Still, because the show was being watched by millions of people around the world, there is certainly no shortage of posts on Twitter about what was happening.
That's an ironic turn of events, though, and not at all what I expected. I thought there would be a steady stream of tweets emanating from the Rose Bowl, and I had expected to send many of them myself. Instead, this highly tech-centric concert was ground zero for a disconnected audience. We were truly "stuck in the moment," to quote one of U2's hit songs, though I doubt anyone wanted to "get out of it."
A YouTube representative did tell me prior to the show that the service was using 24 cameras to film the concert, as well as 24 additional closed-circuit TV cameras. Further, he said YouTube was offering its stream at three different qualities, so that almost anyone could watch, regardless of the speed of their Internet connection.
The YouTube U2 page with the stream of the concert, albeit a rebroadcast. But millions around the world watched the Rose Bowl concert live on YouTube.
(Credit: YouTube)Having YouTube produce such a major Webcast is fitting, given the size and scope of the U2 360 tour. Among its facts and figures are tidbits like this: the 360-degree stage--which allowed huge numbers of fans to watch from behind--featured a 90-foot-tall steel structure, topped by a center pylon reaching 150 feet in the air; the innovative video screen atop the stage weighs 54 tons, is 4,300 square feet when closed, and is 14,000 square feet when opened; the screen itself is comprised of more than a million pieces, including components to illuminate 500,000 pixels, as well as 320,000 fasteners, 30,000 cables and 150,000 machined pieces.
The incredible expanding screen
The video screen, according to information provided by the band's publicists, is "broken into segments mounted on a multiple pantograph system, which enables the screen to 'open up' or spread apart vertically as an effect during different stages of the concerts."
I didn't think I'd ever seen such a thing before, and it just about made my jaw drop when I noticed it. Already, the screen was a sight to behold, but it didn't seem all that big, especially when I thought back to what I'd seen the band do with video during its U2 3D film.
The U2 360 video screen featured an expansion system that allowed it stretch to a size more than three times what it is when closed.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)Well, it turns out I was right: I hadn't seen anything like this before, and neither had anyone else who hadn't been to one of the U2 360 shows.
"The video screen is the first LED screen to be based on a geometric system that allows it to expand in two directions simultaneously," U2 360 architect Mark Fisher told CNET News in an e-mail interview. "Video screens are normally flat panels that track like closet doors, or slatted panels that roll up like garage doors. The 360 degree screen uses a scissor-like motion to expand in two directions. It starts as a solid elliptical ring approximately 20 feet deep, and transforms into form a cone-shaped mesh 60 feet tall."
Fisher added that this is the first time such technology--what he called "transforming geometry"--has been used to "change the shape of a video screen."
And while Fisher said that, in general, the technology behind U2 360 isn't in and of itself new, the way it's being used during the tour most certainly is.
"The show employs a large number of computers and electric motors to control the motion of the screen, and there are large numbers of computer-controlled moving lights," Fisher said. "The video on the screen is also created using powerful computers that 'map' the picture onto the transforming screen. All of this automation and programming is possible because the computers available in 2009 and more powerful, and cheaper, than they were when we created the Vertigo tour in 2005."
Google Earth
Another piece of technology used for the tour--at least in a way that U2's fans can interact with--is Google Earth. Fisher explained that the stage's designers decided it would be fun for fans to see the huge structure on Google Earth.
"So we hooked up with the folks that run the operation, and they agreed to let us put 3D models of the stage into the 3D models of the stadiums where it plays," Fisher said. "The 360 degree stage is turned around in each stadium in six days (and) the models stay in each city on Google Earth for slightly longer."
U2 used Google Earth to give fans a sense of how the stage in its U2 360 tour was built. Here is the London site.
(Credit: U2)On U2's official Web site, the band explained what is going on with the Google Earth project: "If you're following the tour as it moves around...there's a very cool new feature on Google Earth--a model of the 360 stage, in situ, at the venue, about a week ahead of each show."
The site also explained that the model that fans see could be red, green or blue, with each color corresponding to one of three "steel teams" that "leapfrog each other from city to city to build the stage in each stadium."
Fisher also weighed in on the site with the real reason why the band chose to implement Google Earth: "We thought it would be interesting to put up on Google Earth a piece of portable architecture, which is what this structure is," he wrote. "In a way it's got no practical purpose...except that it's fun!"
At NASA Ames Research Center, in Mountain View, Calif., two K10 rovers navigate a lunar-like landscape. The K10 program is designed to help NASA do more advanced surveys and surveillance of the moon, and for the time being, the robots are being deployed in a series of similar environments across the planet.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.--For a few minutes Thursday, as I steered one of NASA's K10 intelligent robots across a small field of rocky, sandy terrain, I could almost imagine myself piloting the rover across the surface of Mars or the moon.
Until, that is, I realized I had pretty much no idea what I was doing, and saw that my struggles to steer the rover forward were actually sending it backward. Given that this little robot is worth at least as much as a mid-range Mercedes, I was relieved to see the eagle-eyed scientist standing a few feet away from it as it approached a group of large rocks that could send it sprawling, a switch in his hand capable of stopping it dead in its tracks.
I was spending the afternoon at NASA's Ames Research Center here, talking with Terry Fong, the director of the Intelligent Robotics Group (IRG), about the K10 rover program--an initiative designed for remote scouting operations on the moon or Mars. To be sure, the program has been around for a few years, but Fong and his team are constantly tweaking the robots, and so what I got my hands on Thursday (remotely, at least) was a great deal more sophisticated than would have been the case just a few years ago.
We had driven out to Ames' faux lunar/Martian landscape, a 40-meters by 80-meters field of rocks and dirt tucked away in a quiet corner on the western side of the giant NASA facility. I've been to Ames many times, but this was by far the most peaceful part of the grounds I've visited: the shriek of a red-tailed hawk as it soared high overhead was the only real sound besides a gentle wind.
Fong took us into a small shed just outside a small trailer, and sitting inside was K10 "Red," one of the two rovers his team has here. It's called red because it has a big patch of red on its body. Its twin, K10 "Black" was nearby, already prowling around, lost in its own lunar fantasy, different from K10 Red only in that its body is black.
The two rovers (see video below, but be prepared for substantial wind noise) are built to travel at "human walking speed," Fong explained, and can handle between 90 percent to 95 percent of the terrain here. That includes some softball-size rocks, plenty of loose sand and dirt and even a few steep inclines. Fong allowed that some of the bigger rocks, maybe soccer ball-sized, might be a problem, and the steepest part of the incline might cause the rovers to lose traction. But in general, these are sturdy little robots built to withstand some truly out-of-this-world conditions.
According to NASA, the K10 robots are crucial elements of the space program's directive to achieve more complete investigation of the moon than was possible during the Apollo program.
"Human missions to the moon will provide numerous opportunities to advance the scientific exploration of the lunar surface," a NASA brochure about the K10 robots reads. "Initially, human exploration of the moon will be for short periods of time--no more than a few weeks per year. To make use of the time between human missions, robots can be used to perform highly repetitive and long-duration tasks, such as site-mapping and science reconnaissance.
"NASA's K10 robots are designed to be remotely operated on planetary surfaces and act as scouts for human explorers. Scouting is an essential phase of fieldwork, particularly for geology, to help establish priorities and scientific objectives. Robotic scouting can improve human exploration of the moon by providing mission planners with detailed ground-level information to supplement and complement data collected by orbiting satellites."
Imagine, in the future, the Constellation program kicks in and NASA begins sending manned missions to the moon. Fong explained that the K10s would be essential to maximizing the research that could be done in between visits by astronauts. Indeed, they could be left behind after one mission and then be deployed to gather intelligence for the next manned mission, data that could complement what NASA can see with instruments in lunar orbit.
And while the K10s I saw ran off of Lithium-Ion laptop batteries with a life of about four hours, Fong said K10s that stay on the moon could run on an ongoing basis on solar, or on power cells.
Continuous navigation
To look at them, today's K10s are unchanged since their introduction eight years ago. But pop the hood, as it were, and what you find is an ever-changing Red Hat Linux-based brain. Every few months, Fong said, he and his team replace the standard PC laptops that serve as the K10s nerve centers with newer and more powerful ones. Even considering what a top-of-the-line laptop costs, a couple new computers are pretty cheap compared to the tens of thousands of dollars' worth of lidar, navigational equipment, sun trackers--which allow the robots to figure out precisely where they are, an advantage over compasses when they're being used for field tests in far northern parts of the world--3D surveying instruments and more.
Fong said that while much about K10s remains the same today as in the past, one recent innovation has been building in the ability to process data on the go, rather than what was possible in early missions on Mars, where rovers had to stop, calculate, move, stop, calculate, move and so on. That means, he said, that now, K10s can make real-time navigation decisions, progress that means they can cover ground much faster than their predecessors.
A K10 mini, a one-fifth scale robot NASA's intelligent robots group has built.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)All told, explained Fong, a K10 robot is smart enough to figure out a path between point A and point B and determine which parts of the terrain it encounters it needs to skirt due to big rocks or other dangerous conditions.
In some cases, the IRG scientists will test the limits of what the K10 can do. Fong said that during trials last summer at the lunar-like Black Point Lava Flow, in Arizona, he and his team tweaked the K10s' algorithms so that the rovers would push on, despite confronting bush clusters that compute as rocks to be avoided.
"The robot says, 'Hey, it's rocks,' so we make it a lot more aggressive," said Fong.
Five football fields
One reason the K10s are so important to NASA is that they feature 3D laser scanners capable of surveying as much as 500 yards ahead and identifying and analyzing objects as small as pencil erasers. Similarly, the rovers carry downward pointing cameras that take very high-resolution pictures every few feet, images that can then be used to help the mission planners decide where and how to explore in the future.
Back in a lab at Ames, Fong reached into a large suitcase and pulled out what he called a K10 mini (see video below). This is a one-fifth size model rover that is an experiment to see what's possible on a much smaller scale.
The idea behind the mini rover, Fong said, was to try to understand what's possible with a robot that small. And while it's only the size of a small dog, he explained that its basic software was the same as its larger cousins, and was actually built up around the smallest Thinkpad laptop the IRG scientists could find.
And now, the IRG team is looking toward what's next for the K10s. And that, said Fong, is to determine how best to marry the rovers with human teams so that they can be used to support explorers instead of being autonomous. The Spirit and Opportunity Mars rovers were built to do everything on their own, the K10s can be employed for wide ranges of tasks that aren't efficient or productive for the folks in space suits. And not only that, but because the K10s can be mounted on the lunar exploration vehicles NASA expects to send its personnel around on the moon in, they can be used for research, surveying and exploration wherever the astronauts go.
But at the same time, NASA knows they have a great deal of utility as autonomous explorers, and on the moon, which is within reasonable striking distance of the Earth, there's even less risk involved than there would be on Mars with putting the K10s through rigorous paces since, even if one got damaged, the next manned lunar mission could come and fix them.
Of course, if you're part of the IRG team, or you're an astronaut trained in operating, or working with, a rover, you probably have a lot of confidence about what the robot's limits are. Why else would anyone trust you with such an expensive toy?
For me, however, clutching that joystick back at Ames, trying to get my K10 to go right, or hop over that little rock, every wrong move seems like potential catastrophe. I think it's going to be a while before anyone lets me play with one of those thing without having a guy watching every move I make with it, ready to push his big red button to keep me from sending it sprawling and costing taxpayers a Mercedes' worth of cash. And I'm OK with that.
That's one small step for man, one giant leap for iPhone.
OK, that's probably a little overly dramatic, but the new NASA iPhone app, which was released Friday, is pretty cool.
With NASA's iPhone app, space geeks can access all kinds of information about their favorite missions.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)Designed to provide information, updates, and images on all current and scheduled NASA missions, the app--which can be found in Apple's App Store under the name "NASA app for iPhone--nicely allows you to search for any specific mission, say, Constellation, and then find information and images just for that project.
"Users can access NASA countdown clocks, the NASA Image of the Day, Astronomy Image of the Day, online videos, NASA's many Twitter feeds," and more, the space agency said in a press release about the app. It also allows users to track where the International Space Station is at any moment, as well as other spacecraft orbiting the planet, in three different views: maps with labels and borders, available visible imagery of satellites, and satellite positions overlaid on maps with country labels and borders.
Already, NASA nuts--you know who you are--have had access to much of this information online. But now, having it all available in a free iPhone app is going to keep these people happily staring down at the screen of their devices no matter where they are.
And for NASA, anything it can do to get more people excited about its various missions and projects is a good thing as it struggles for public resources and attention in an era where the economy is in trouble and people are increasingly distracted by other things.
The PS3 Slim, the newest iteration of the PlayStation 3, comes with the lowest price ever for the PS3: $299. Because of the price cut, the PS3's sales rose in August and September, and many people see signs of a resurgence for the console.
(Credit: Sony)Is Sony's PlayStation 3 at long last ready to stop being its rivals' punching bag?
With its first-place finish in September in number of units sold, Sony finally has a tangible response to persistent criticism that its PS3 can't keep up with its next-generation video game console competitors, Microsoft's Xbox 360 and Nintendo's Wii.
For the month, according to video game analysts at the NPD Group, Sony sold 491,800 PS3s in the United States, while Nintendo moved 462,800 Wiis and consumers bought 352,600 of Microsoft's Xbox 360s. It was the first time since the next-generation console wars began in earnest nearly three years ago that the PS3 finished a month on top.
Yet, as everyone knows, a single positive piece of data does not a trend make--something Sony's competitors are quick to point out--especially when the existing trend is so contradictory. So, on the heels of those rosy-at-long-last September numbers, and the August price cut and launch of the new PS3 Slim that preceded them, can Sony finally demonstrate conclusively to its detractors that it is through being badly outmaneuvered?
According to a group of experts interviewed for this article, the answer appears to be yes. No one will yet predict that Sony is ready to grab hold of the leadership position it enjoyed in previous console generations. However, there does seem to be widespread agreement that for the first time since its November 2006 launch, the PS3 is ready to seriously compete for that role.
"I think that the fact that they did introduce a new footprint for the PS3 (the Slim) and a lower price point, coupled with some of the really high-demand games" coming out for the platform, "could really prime the pump for Sony to have a resurgence for the PS3," said Brian Crecente, editor of the popular video game blog Kotaku.
"I do think that we are probably going to see, if not it topping the charts leading into the holiday, it...doing better than it has in (the recent) past," he said.
Beginning a comeback in a hole
There's no doubt, however, that Sony is beginning any PS3 resurgence in a rather sizable hole. Since the start of the current console generation (in November 2006 for the PS3 and the Wii, and November 2005 for the Xbox 360), Sony has sold 25.26 million PS3s worldwide and 9.76 million in the U.S, according to VGChartz, a Web site that aggregates video game sales data. By comparison, the Wii has moved 54.19 million units worldwide, of which 25.05 million were in the U.S., and Microsoft--with its one-year head-start--has sold 32.51 million Xboxes, including 18.66 million in the U.S.
By those measures, the PS3 has a minimum of a 2-1 disadvantage, in the U.S. at least, when it comes to the PS3 install base. That fact puts pressure on third-party developers working on games for the console because they know that there are at least twice as many Xbox buyers in the U.S. as there are for the PS3.
That dynamic, in turn, has led to one of the biggest complaints over the years about the PS3: that the software lineup has paled in comparison to that of the Xbox. To be sure, Sony has always disputed that notion.
Hard to prognosticate
Over the last three years, this space has been home to multiple arguments that the PS3 would one day emerge as the clear-cut winner of the next-gen console wars. But there's also been plenty of room here for the theory that Sony's flagship video game device was doomed to languish behind the Xbox and the Wii.
Clearly, prognostication about the PS3's fortunes has been difficult. And with the state of the economy in flux, supply chains always hard to analyze, and consumers' whims ever-changing, there's no way to know for sure how the console wars will go from here on out.
But Sony definitely feels like it's finally in the driver's seat.
"Overall, we're just hitting a stride that just (reasserts) what we knew all along--that there's tremendous value under the (PS3's) hood," said Julie Han, Sony PlayStation spokesperson.
That's a notion that video game industry analysts agree with. Yet when talking about Sony's laudable September numbers, they also point, first and foremost, to the fact that there were a lot of consumers sitting on the sidelines, just waiting for the company to lower the PS3's price. In August, with the release of the $299 PS3 Slim, Sony did just that.
"It's really a combination of pent-up demand and (the point) where value and pricing meet," said Jesse Divnich, an analyst with Electronic Entertainment Design and Research. "The (thing) about the PS3 was, it was really a system ahead of its time. Developers didn't really have the capabilities to take advantage of all the power in the PS3, and at the same time you had systems like the Wii, which just had perfect timing. But now, (the PS3) has caught up."
That means, Divnich continued, that the time has finally come where the PS3's jam-packed collection of a powerful video game console, a Blu-ray player, and built-in Wi-Fi met consumers' needs, even as the price dropped to where large numbers of people feel they can afford it. The lowest-priced Xbox costs $199, while the Wii runs $249.
Finally hitting a 'sweet spot'
Divnich said that at $299, the PS3 has finally hit its "sweet spot." And he said while it's likely the initial boost of sales that came as a result of the August price cut will slow down, "Long term, into 2010 and 2011, I don't think the PS3 is going to be in last place to the degree it was before. The gap between the systems will be much smaller."
For his part, Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter said he expects the PS3 to outsell the Xbox during the holiday season because of the perceived value of the $299 PS3, loaded as it is with the Blu-ray player and Wi-Fi. He and others do, however, still think that Nintendo will sell more Wiis because of the broader general appeal of that device and the fact that it is seen as a better Christmas present.
"Is Sony back? Yeah," said Pachter. "Are they back as the leader? Probably not. Are they back in second? Probably."
Another analyst, Lazard Capital Markets Senior Vice President Colin Sebastian, also attributed the September PS3 sales boost to the "pent-up" demand for a lower price, and said that there would have been serious trouble for the console if the results had not been so good.
"If they had not shown the uptick with the price cut," Sebastian said, "then we'd all be putting a nail in the coffin for (the PS3). But what we're seeing is that there's still life left for the PS3, and that's an encouraging data point (for Sony)."
Still, as Pachter put it, "Microsoft is not the type of company that's going to stay (down) for a long time. They don't like it."
That's why, Pachter said, if the PS3 can keep pace with the Xbox for the next few months, there's a good chance that Microsoft will drop the price of its console another $50 sometime early next year, a move he doesn't think Sony would be able to match.
To be sure, Microsoft wouldn't easily cut the Xbox's price--"they're certainly not going to give money away just for the hell of it," Pachter said--but it is an arrow in their quiver.
Sebastian said he, too, could see an Xbox price cut next year, as well as one for the Wii. Would Sony follow suit if its rivals did so?
"They could do it," Sebastian said. "It's just a matter of what their tolerance is for absorbing less revenue on the hardware side, and whether they can make up that revenue on the software side."
According to Xbox spokesman David Dennis, a price cut is just one of many things Microsoft would consider as a way to keep pace with the market. He said other possibilities include different hardware and software bundles. "There's a lot of different levers you can pull," Dennis said.
Not surprisingly, Dennis is dismissive of the PS3's sales boost. He agreed that there were a lot of people waiting to buy the console at a lower price, but said that the impressive initial jump in units sold came as a result of early leaks of pictures and information about the PS3 Slim, and so there were "months of pent-up demand."
Further, he predicted that Sony would not see a sustained resurgence for its console and that even in September, when the PS3 outsold the Xbox and the Wii, Microsoft brought in more revenue for the entire Xbox ecosystem--including accessories, software, and fees for online services--than did Sony.
The two halves of 2010
In the end, most people seem to agree that the overall fortunes of the consoles have as much to do with software as price. That's why each of the analysts talked to for this story pointed to a bright future for Sony: They see a lot of strength in the PS3's coming games lineup, which includes titles like God of War III and Gran Turismo 5. And then there's also Sony's PlayStation Motion Controller, which could bring the PS3 more Wii-like functionality.
That's why Divnich said he thinks that the PS3 is likely to dominate the first half of 2010.
But he also expects that Microsoft will release its highly anticipated Project Natal motion-sensitive controller in the second half of 2010, a move that could stir up the console pot anew. Indeed, Divnich said he thinks that the Xbox will once again overtake the PS3 at that point.
And after that? It's anybody's guess.
A scene from the Boston show of U2's 360 show, what has been called the biggest rock show in history. This Sunday's show, at the Rose Bowl, in Pasadena, Calif., will be streamed live on YouTube.
(Credit: U2)U2 fans who can't make it to the band's giant concert this Sunday evening at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., don't fret: you'll be able to watch anyway.
The band has announced that it plans to stream the concert on YouTube, and fans around the world will be able to tune in to watch it live.
"The band has wanted to do something like this for a long time," said U2's manager, Paul McGuinness, in a statement on the band's Web site. "As we're (already) filming the LA show, it's the perfect opportunity to extend the party beyond the stadium. Fans often travel long distances to come to see U2--this time U2 can go to them, globally."
According to the BBC, this is not U2's first experiment with live streaming. The band "allowed fans to watch a Boston date of their Popmart tour in 1997 via Microsoft's MSN Web site," wrote the BBC.
In addition, YouTube has also experimented with large live events. Around 700,000 people watched its YouTube Live concert/variety show in November, which was streamed from San Francisco and featured several celebrity acts including pop stars Katy Perry and will.i.am.
U2's current tour, called U2 360, is said to feature the biggest rock show in history, at least as measured by the complexity of the concerts' infrastructure.
