Tech Talk iconTech Talk

NASA Redesigns Site to Be More Social

Aiming to keep abreast of the times, the U.S. space agency today rolled out a major upgrade to its presence on the Web. The new site has the same address,, but it features many of the newer bells and whistles that surfers have grown to expect from contemporary online resources in the mode of the Web 2.0 revolution. The move comes as NASA prepares to mark its fiftieth anniversary in the upcoming year.

The site, which is one of the federal government's most robust and content-intensive resources on the Internet, has generally been adept at keeping up with serving its users' needs in the past, but it's been nearly four years since the agency has given it a major makeover. The designers of the new iteration, dubbed 5.0, say the revamped site has received more than a cosmetic facelift. It features a new level of interactivity and customization and provides the opportunity to comment on selected NASA stories, create personal playlists of favorite NASA videos, and share agency content with social networking sites on the Internet, according to NASA.

"We're very excited to roll this new version of out for the public," said Brian Dunbar, NASA's internet services manager, in Washington, D.C. "We've been able to add new functionality to the site, broaden and simplify the navigation to NASA's wide range of content, and still keep the features that users liked best about the old design. All together, the new design will make it much easier for users to complete their top tasks."

Following a partnering arrangement worked out two years ago with Google (see our blog entry "Google Goes Into Space"), the new site also features Google's Customer Search Engine, as well as tools to apply "crowd wisdom" to search results by weighting findings according to how many previous searchers clicked on a particular link.

The agency has revamped the customized MyNASA feature to allow users to collect their favorite content, including videos and news feeds, all in one location, NASA stated. This could be a fan favorite among today's more savvy users, as content from NASA is free of usage restrictions for U.S. citizens, because of its status as government property.

In addition to the internal NASA team, the re-launch owes its enhanced technical capabilities to contractors from Critical Mass, of Toronto (for the new interface), and eTouch Systems, of Fremont, Calif. (for design implementation and infrastructure support).

"This new approach to the NASA home page arose from ongoing feedback from the site's users, which we get continuously through e-mails, customer-satisfaction surveys, and traffic statistics," Dunbar added. "The initial concepts and subsequent iterations have been put through three rounds of user testing with external audiences. We're proud of the initial reaction to the new design and the entire NASA Web team looks forward to adding new features and listening closely to user feedback."

So give it a look. Kick the tires. And offer your thoughts on it directly to the space agency. After all, you paid for it.

Taser International On The Defensive

It's been a busy couple of months for the PR department of Taser International, the maker of the controversial Taser stun gun. Canada is in the midst of 9 separate inquiries investigating the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski after he was shocked repeatedly with a Taser gun at Vancouver's main airport. Just last week, a Canadian died in custody, 4 days after being shot with a Taser gun--right on the heels of another Canadian who died 30 hours after being shocked. According to CBS News, at least 6 North Americans died after being shocked by Taser guns in late November. Taser International has successfully defended itself in court in all post-Taser death cases, and it's easy to see why: why would it take 4 days for an electric shock to kill someone? But I can't help but be a little spooked by these unexplained deaths.


[see larger]

On Nov. 23, the United Nations Committee Against Torture issued a memo suggesting that the use of the TaserX26â''the model of the weapon commonly used by police departmentsâ''might constitute torture. Newspapers the world over picked up the story, including here, here and here.

But let's take a closer look at the text of that UN report.

This is all it says about Taser guns:

The Committee was worried that the use of TaserX26 weapons, provoking extreme pain, constituted a form of torture, and that in certain cases it could also cause death, as shown by several reliable studies and by certain cases that had happened after practical use.

The text was embedded in a section on prison deaths in Portugal. Taser International lashed back, saying that the committee was â''out of touchâ'' with the challenges faced by police departments. I can understand why, in an environment where prisoners are already treated poorly, the abuse of captives would be a valid concern. Nonetheless, I have to side with Taser on this one: the UN document's vague references to supporting evidence and the indeterminate mention of â''the use of TaserX26 weaponsâ'' does nothing to clarify what makes it torture. Do all Taser uses constitute torture, even when electric shock is used as an alternative to a bullet?

A few days later, a study by the United Kingdom Defence Science and Technology Laboratory was published, which concluded that Taser guns are unlikely to harm human hearts under normal conditions, and Taser Internationalâ''s stock rose the most it had in four months.

But if that is the case, what explains the rash of deaths in the last few weeks? Is it just an unlucky coincidence? Are they really, as Taser International would have us believe, more cases of a mysterious disorder known as â''excited delirium,â'' which the company describes as a potentially fatal condition? The medical literature so far supports the theory that Tasers do not cause cardiac arrest in normal hearts, but that doesn't say anything about stressed or diseased hearts. For IEEE Spectrum's in-depth discussion of why the human heart is generally safe from a Taser shock, check out this piece, written by Mark Kroll, a prominent biomedical engineer. For an accessible look at how Taser experiments are carried out in the lab, take a look at this piece written by Pat Tchou, a cardiac electrophysiologist at the Cleveland Clinic.

At the core of this debate is a whole lot of sloppy talk. The lack of nuance in the UN committee's statement suggests that its members didn't really do their homework, whereas Taser's reliance on apocryphal diagnoses is not helping the company make its case.

For more on excited delirium, read the Globe & Mail's coverage of the second annual "Sudden Death, Excited Delirium and In-Custody Death Conference," which took place last week.

EVS-23: A Surge of Energy for Electric Cars

Anaheim, Californiaâ''What a difference a year makes!

Yesterday, a Congressman spoke up from the floor at EVSâ''for the first time ever, said a startled moderator. It brought home just how much has changed in the world of electric vehicles. And how fast that has occurred.

This yearâ''s Electric Vehicle Symposium (EVS-23) saw more than 450 people spend all of Sunday at a workshop on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the usual windowless hall. Automakers, electric utilities, regulators, and even lawmakers debated the complex issues involved in designing, building and selling vehicles with electric drive.

Oh, the Congressman? That was US Representative Jay Insley (Dâ''Washington), who detailed a bill in the House to eliminate oil-industry tax benefits as one way to encourage development of electric vehicles. (He was also touting his new book, Apolloâ''s Fire: Igniting Americaâ''s Clean Energy Economy.)

To understand how far things have come, consider: A year ago, the Chevrolet Volt was unknown. It would have been breathtaking to learn that General Motors intended to build and sell a four-seat vehicle with a 40-mile electric range. A month later, at Januaryâ''s Detroit Auto Show, that very thing happened.

And consider: The demand for plug-in hybrids has exploded, far beyond the supply. Small conversion shops share information online, and charge a handful of customers $10,000 or more to enable them to plug in their Priuses to accept charge off the gridâ''extending its all-electric range from a mile to perhaps 10â''was still far out on the radar.

Now, grumbled the City of Vancouverâ''s Brian Beck, â''Iâ''m ready to change the building code to require electric plugs throughout parking garages, but automakers tell me I canâ''t get their plug-in prototypesâ''so I have to look toward private conversion companies just so we can test plug-ins in our fleet.â''

And how many plug-in hybrids exist today, in the world? Less than 100.

The challenges of making electric-drive vehicles a reality are enormous. There have always been true believers, but when five major automakers come in with large, expensive displays on the exhibit floorâ''Ford, General Motors, Honda, Mercedes-Benz and Toyotaâ''something real may be happening.

Iâ''ll be posting every day from EVS-23 from now through Wednesday. If anyone has specific issues theyâ''d like me to explore, please contact me: J V [dot] spectrum [at] ieee [dot] org.

NASA: New Student Contest for Future of Flight

Who's better qualified to imagine what air transport will look like 50 years from now than people who will be using it then? That's got to be the thinking behind a new competition for high school and college students announced this week by the U.S. space agency.

The 2007-2008 Aeronautics Competition invites students to submit essays that try to picture what the all-purpose transport aircraft of the mid-21st century will be. To focus their imaginations, NASA has asked students to consider the case of an historic aircraft that changed the future: the famed DC-3 of the mid-20th century. It was the airplane that revolutionized the commercial aeronautics industry in its day.

High school students are invited to write a report describing how the transportation of goods and passengers might be revolutionized with the future equivalent of the DC-3 by the year 2058, according to the agency. College students are invited to design such an aircraft, using guidelines provided by NASA, and suggest a minimum of three valid operational scenarios for their proposed vehicle.

High school participants can learn more about the contest here. University students are directed to go here.

NASA said in a statement that the winners in each category will be eligible for cash awards and student internships within the aerospace program. Entries will be judged by federal, university, and industry representatives. Applicants will need to file a letter of intent to enter the competition by 15 December 2007 for high school participants and by 19 January 2008 for college participants.

Good luck to all of them.

A Needed Tool for Analyzing Nanoparticles in Liquid and Air is Already Here


Much of the problem attributed to determining the toxicity of nanoparticles has been that we donâ''t have the tools to perform proper analysis. Sure, we can use different microscopy tools to look at nanoparticles, but this is typically only in a vacuum with very expensive equipment that is impossible to have leave the lab.

Many calls have gone out for equipment that will analyze nanoparticles both in liquid and in the air, none more urgent than the one it appeared in Nature one year ago.

But thereâ''s a company that already has developed a tool that enables the real-time visualization of nanoparticles in liquidâ''Nanosight Ltd.

The tool essentially uses lasers, light-scattering techniques and some sophisticated software that allow for individually tracking particles and showing particle size distribution.

I had the opportunity to see them make a presentation at the UK Nanoforum this week in London, and was a little stunned at the capabilities of the technology in the context of all the furor that has developed over the potential toxicity of nanoparticles and the lack of tools to better get a handle on it.

I took the opportunity to ask Jeremy Warren, the CEO of Nanosight, if the tool could also be used to analyze nanoparticles in air. The answer was a quick, â''Of course, but there are so many interesting uses for it in liquid media.â''

So, okay there is a tool for analyzing nanoparticles both in air and liquid, and it can be carried around anywhere like a laptop, and we donâ''t have to wait for five years for it to be developed.

Now we have a research agenda and at least one of the tools that will help us conduct that research, could we get on with the research and lower the volume on the scare until we know more.

Brand Protection and Nanotechnology: An Application that Works and a New Website to Help

You may recall my attempt to update the market information about nanotechnology and product tagging back in September by adding a company, Singular-ID, to the list of companies that are applying nanotechnology to product tagging.

Singular-ID is one of those rare companies in the world of nanotechnology that actually has a full-blown product, not just some material waiting to be licensed by some company that makes product-tagging devices.

At the heart of their technology is a nanoscale magnetic material that acts as a sort of â''fingerprintâ'' for each product and enables the device, but they went ahead and created the device and the software to run it too.

To take it all one step further, Singular-ID has launched a new website, No To Fakes, which is intended to help consumers and brand owners defeat the counterfeit culture, and save industries from automotive to fashion billions of dollars in lost revenues from product piracy.

On the website, a brand owner can control their own page content and keep it updated to advise customers how to ensure they are buying a genuine product. In case of a purchase of a suspected fake, the customer can upload information, receipts and photos directly to the brand owner for their investigations.

A Patented Nanomaterial and a Prayer

As the UK Trade and Investment office rolled out their success stories at the Nanoforum conference in London this week, among the many thoughts that occurred to me was the joke of the boy who cries out while riding his bike â''Hey, ma, look no hands.â'' And then shortly after, â''Look, Ma, no teeth.â''

In the case of quite a few of the presentations at the event, it went more like â''Look, I can make a nanomaterial,â'' which left me wanting to add the punch line, â''Yeah, but no business.â''

The event was designed to be a dog-and-pony show to promote nanotechnology entrepreneurship in the Kingdom. Somewhat of an irony since the UK government is about to motivate some of these companies to either leave the country or sell out early with its proposed capital gains tax increase from 8% to 18%, which I blogged on back in October.

It is a peculiar phenomenon with nanotechnology companies of developing a business around a technology that they have meticulously patented and then plan to license to anyone that could find a use for it. A patent and hopes of licenses seems to be the business plan of many of these companies.

This seems a risky proposition when one considers that there is more than one way to make a nanomaterial that will satisfy a particular application. If you make the product that could use such a nanomaterial, why pay a license fee, just make it yourself.

A notable exception to this trend was a presentation made by an Indian company at the event, I-Can Nano. Sure they could just make a nanomaterial, but they went ahead and made the product enabled by the material: paint. Pretty prosaic stuff in the context of exotic quantum dots, but itâ''s a product that has sales and revenues.

This must have had some at the event scratching their heads thinking, â''Why didnâ''t I think of that?â''

As far as the state of nanotechnology commercialization in the UK, which this event was intended to showcase, you have to give the companies credit. While the US has been investing over $1 billion a year in nanotechnology, and Japan nearly the same, the UK back in 2003 allocated £90 million ($185 million) over six years.

With such a paucity of government funding compared to the US, Germany or Japan, they have done much. But some improved business plans might be in order for these nanotechnology companies, not just in the UK but around the world.

Junior, the robotic car, has been very very good to Stanford


Junior, the Stanford Racing Teamâ''s entry into the DARPA Urban Challenge, came in second in the national contest, held Nov. 3rd in Victorville, Calif., losing first place honors to Carnegie Mellon Universityâ''s entry, Boss. Both cars followed California traffic law and completed the complicated course, Boss simply did it faster.

In this game, however, second place isnâ''t half bad. The Stanford team took home a $1 million prize, and bragging rights; several vehicles crashed while negotiating traffic circles and intersections and contending with traffic; other cars simply became confused and gave up.

And second place looked even better this month when Volkswagen of America, one of the sponsors of Stanfordâ''s entry, announced it would donate $5.75 million to the university to create the Volkswagen Automotive Innovation Lab (VAIL), to continue to work on automotive research, particularly autonomous driving. The Lab will include a 8,000 square foot research facility and an outdoor test driving space.

Perhaps the sight of a driverless vehicle will soon be as commonplace on the Stanford campus as it was in Victorville, Calif., in early November.

Said Stanford Racing Team co-leader Mike Montemerlo, â''At first when a robot drove by weâ''d all get up and clap, and just over the course of two or three hours, it got to the point where youâ''d turn around and say, â''Oh, there goes another robot.â'' Itâ''s amazing how quickly you acclimate to this idea of robots driving around in a city.â''

On Eve of Bali Climate Confab, Kyoto Wins One, Loses One

With representatives of virtually all the worldâ''s countries about to convene in Bali to discuss what should be done next to deal with climate change, two recent events are sure to affect the political chemistry. On 24 Nov., Australia elected a new government that has pledged to promptly ratify the Kyoto Protocolâ''the 1997 addendum to a 1992 treaty, which commits the advanced industries countries to collectively cut their emissions by about 5 percent by 2012, compared to 1990 levels. But just the day after the Australian election, Canadaâ'' prime minister told a Commonwealth meeting that Kyoto was a mistake that the world must never repeat.

Australiaâ''s ratification will leave the United States diplomatically isolated, as the only industrial country not to have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. But at least its negotiators will have some support from Canada's conservative leader, Stephen Harper. Speaking at the end of a Commonwealth meeting in Kampala, Uganda, he denounced the protocol for subjecting several dozen industrial countries to binding emissions targets, without holding countries with the fastest growing emissionsâ''notably China and Indiaâ''to similar targets. Harper promised that Canada will enter the Bali negotiations with a simple position: all major polluters must be included, or there will be no follow-on deal.

Canada, unlike its giant neighbor to the south, has ratified Kyoto. But the reasons for its recent change of heart are not hard to discern. Since 1990, despite its Kyoto commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 6 percent, its emissions have actually climbed by 25.3 percent. Those of the supposedly delinquent United States increased by 16.3, a very poor performance by global standards but considerably better than Canadaâ''s. This is an acutely embarrassing position for a country that likes to adopt an international attitude almost as high-minded as Swedenâ''s.

Rather than apologize at Bali, Harper obviously decided to go on the offensive and say what he really believes. In the past Harper has described Kyoto as a â''money sucking socialist scheme,â'' according to Canadian press reports.

Australiaâ''s situation is quirkier. Before last weekâ''s election, the previous government was planning to go to Bali arguing that it was actually meeting its Kyoto target, despite its refusal to ratify the protocol. Because Australiaâ''s economy is so dependent on fossil energy, the country persuaded Kyoto negotiators to give it a 2012 target 8 percent higher than 1990 (making it just one of three countries to obtain such a dispensation). Then, according to two professors at Australian National University writing recently in the Canberra Times, Australiaâ''s negotiators also got the Kyoto conclave to take emissions changes resulting from modified land use into account. As it happened, for reasons entirely coincidental, Australia had just registered from 1990 to 1996 a 50 percent decrease in emissions associated with land clearing. This meant that Australia immediately inherited, upon finalization of the protocol, a net 6 percent decrease in emissions, relative to 1990.

Today, taking land use changes into account, Australiaâ''s emissions are just 6.3 percent higher than in 1990; without accounting for land, which is the more usual way of citing such numbers, the increase is 25.6 percent. Practically speaking, in terms of how Australia sees its record and what it can immediately accomplish, thereâ''s probably not much difference between the positions of the old and new governments. Symbolically and diplomatically, however, the significance of Australiaâ''s Kyoto switch will be immense. U.S. negotiators will arrive at Bali on the defensiveâ''but taking some consolation, at least, that the sometimes self-righteous neighbor to the north is having second thoughts about the Kyoto scheme.

Nintendo ranks last in Greenpeace's updated Guide to Greener Electronics

RecyclingSymbolGreen.JPGGreenpeace has updated its Guide to Greener Electronics just in time for a holiday shopping season in which more and more consumers are trying to shop green, that is, for environmentally friendly products. And Nintendo received the dubious distinction of being the first company ever to receive a perfect zero, putting it at the bottom of the rankings.

The organization looked at the top 18 manufacturers of personal computers, mobile phones, TVs, and games consoles and rated them in terms of their chemical policies and practice, including their efforts to phase out PVCs and brominated flame retardants; and their policies and practices on taking back and recycling their products. A perfect score is 10, calculated from a 30-point scale.

Top of the heap was Sony Ericsson, with a 7.7, up from second place thanks to its improved reporting of old mobile phones recycled. The companyâ''s products are due to be free of brominated flame retardants by January 1, and Sony Ericsson is clearing phthalates out of its product line as well. Samsung moved from eighth place to second,

also with a 7.7. Samsung has eliminated PVC from its LCD panels and is doing better on recycling.

Taking an embarrassing tumble from first to ninth is Nokia, with a 6.7. Greenpeace slapped Nokia with a penalty for corporate misbehavior on its recycling practices. Motorola also fell dramatically, from ninth place to fourteenth, also getting that misbehavior penalty. The company also has yet to announce a schedule for phasing out brominated flame retardants and PVCs from its entire product line. Apple edged up from eleventh to tenth after announcing that all new iMacs and many iPods are being sold with casings free of brominated flame retardants and that internal cables are PVC-free. And then thereâ''s Nintendo. Nintendo scored zero on every criteria. Greenpeace notes that this allows â''infinite room for future improvement.â''

Top to bottom, the lineup looks like this: Sony Ericsson, Samsung, Sony, Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, LGE, Fujitsu-Siemens, Nokia, HP, Apple, Acer, Panasonic, Motorola, Sharp, Microsoft, Philips, and Nintendo. The detailed score charts and analyses are here.


Tech Talk

IEEE Spectrum’s general technology blog, featuring news, analysis, and opinions about engineering, consumer electronics, and technology and society, from the editorial staff and freelance contributors.

Newsletter Sign Up

Sign up for the Tech Alert newsletter and receive ground-breaking technology and science news from IEEE Spectrum every Thursday.

Load More