Thoughts

Speedometers should store speed for last 10-15 minutes of driving

I got a ticket on the 1st of December, a trumped up charge for “reckless driving” through the Virginia countryside. My wife and I both looked at the speedometer when the trooper started flashing his lights behind us, and we were doing 72-73 tops. We’ve got a MINI, and it’s really hard to miss the speeds. That speedo is stuck right in the middle of the dashboard and it’s big. The trooper said he clocked us at over 80, then came back with a nicely rounded figure on the ticket: 85 in a 65 mph zone. Isn’t it so nice of them to round up our speeds? I know that gives me a really warm and fuzzy feeling about cops… Anyway, I tried telling him about our real speed, but his desire to give a big, fat ticket was much stronger than his sense of justice.

Later in the evening, as I mulled over it, I got this idea. Why shouldn’t speedometers in our cars store the speeds we’ve been driving at for the past 10-15 minutes? The computer could sample our speed every 5 or 10 seconds, then graph it nicely and be able to spit back some figures at us: maximum speed, average speed, instant speed at certain time intervals, etc. We should be able to review that data, and confront these ticket-happy cops on the spot with real data from our cars. Of course, this sort of a system should be tamper-proof in one way or another, so it can’t be tweaked by hackers.

I really think this would solve a lot of the problems with false speeding tickets. One could go to court with a printout from our cars listing the speeds we drove at the time of the ticket, and we could also obtain a certification from our dealer or mechanic stating that our speedometer is accurate and hasn’t been tampered with, and then we’d have some real ammunition against all these cops out to make quotas.

Standard
Thoughts

The next media player

I sat down to breakfast this morning and kept thinking about my media and the problems I face when trying to get things properly cataloged, and realized the tools still aren’t out there to do things correctly.

Current media players (such as iTunes, Windows Media Player, Winamp, etc.) are good for playing music, or for playing video, and are fairly good when it comes to cataloging audio, but they have a ways to go when it comes to cataloging video or – and this is the most important thing – cataloging MEDIA.

Let me explain myself. Audio files are one type of media. Video files are another. Writings are yet another. So are photos or graphics. Web pages can use all types, and they can be though of as another media type as well, a hybrid, so to speak. There isn’t a media player out there that combines the ability to play and properly catalog ALL of these different types of media, and in particular, to correlate them in meaningful and flexible ways. Here’s are a few example that illustrate the current shortcomings:

  • I have a song by a certain artist, but I also have his or her music video for that particular song. They are seen as different files by the media player, and they come up as two different search results, when really, a common container should be created for that particular piece, and within it, the two pieces should be displayed together. While playing the song, I should be able to switch seamlessly between the audio version and the video version, without having to restart the song. The lyrics should also be stored as a third piece within that container, and if I want to, I should be able to display the lyrics onscreen for either the audio or the video version of the song.
  • If I have a video file, I should be able to properly catalog it within the media player, but I have yet to find a player that will do it right. iTunes has recently started to offer the ability to view and store videos within its library. It also happens to be my favorite player. Skipping right over the misnomer inherent in the name of the software – Tunes means songs, not videos – it doesn’t allow me to catalog the videos correctly. I can enter tags for the videos, just like I can for the songs, but the same fields that apply to songs (Artist, Composer, Album, etc.) are provided as tags for the videos. That’s wrong. Appropriate, but parallel tags should be provided, such as Actor, Director, Studio, Series, etc.
  • Lyrics can be entered for songs, but they cannot be entered for videos. That’s a clear shortcoming. What if I have a video interview. A transcript is also provided for that interview, in text format. I should be able to store that transcript right alongside the video, so I can access it as needed.
  • Let’s look at books. The audio and written version of books should be stored in the same container in my media player. I should be able to switch between both. Also, if a movie was made of the book, and I have that movie in my library, it should be stored in that same container as well. If I’m reading a paragraph in the book, I should be able to switch directly to the movie scene that deals with that subject if I want to do so. If I want to access a list of the photos (provided with the book), I should be able to browse just the photos.
  • Similarly, if I have an album by an artist, I should be able to see all of the cover art and photos for that album by switching to it while I’m playing the song.
  • In my photo library, I should be able to store audio narration for a single photo or group of photos that I have taken, or have received through email from one of my friends, or have purchased or downloaded from the Internet.
  • These containers that store the different media types for a piece of information, should be easily importable and exportable as a whole or in pieces. If I have two computers at home, I shouldn’t have to re-create each container by combining the pieces. If I want to copy a container from one computer to the other, I should be able to do so without problems, even if one of the computers is Macintosh and the other is Windows or Linux, as long as the media player was written for each of these operating systems.

The good news is that we can do this with the current technology. This isn’t some fairy tale. It should only take about 6 months to 1 1/2 years or so to develop the product. Yes, some of the media types will have to be re-tooled to allow for syncing of text and audio/video, but this CAN be done, and an amazing product awaits at the end of the tunnel.

Standard
Thoughts

The personal computer of the future

We’re still several years away from a device that can successfully combine a computer, phone, handheld, digital camera and music/video player, in a size/weight/price combination that’ll make most techies happy. But I’ve already got that device on my wishlist!

By computer, I mean laptop. I think that desktops will eventually disappear. Not only are they energy hogs, but they are simply too big and they aren’t portable. They take up too much space. Bulky desktops are already on their way out. The computer of the future will probably evolve from our current laptop form factor. I think the real breakthrough will come when OLED becomes a mature technology, and virtual keyboards are also viable. By virtual keyboard I mean either film you can type on, or simply a projected keyboard where your fingers breaking light waves trigger key down events.

The computer of the future will have all of the capability that we crave in a form factor that will likely approach the size of our current credit cards. It will probably be thicker, but I can envision a laptop with a rollout OLED or wall projection display and virtual keyboard that boots up in a 1-3 seconds, acts as a cellphone and digital camera, and that’s about 3-4 inches in terms of width/length, and about 1 inch or less in terms of thickness.

Standard
Thoughts

Securing wireless networks

The business of securing wireless networks is booming. Everyone wants to go wireless, but are afraid of the seemingly poor security. I’ve read plenty of articles about companies who have come out with all sorts of approaches, such as client/server data encryption, special networking equipment, etc. I haven’t seen much news about a particular technology that could help us secure our wireless networking in a fairly easy to understand and implement fashion, by using GPS technology. Let me explain.

GPS technology has gotten to be commonplace these days. It would be fairly easy to come up with the hardware that can use this technology. But how to put it to work? Well, we’ve come up with some pretty good solutions for encrypting the data that goes back and forth between the clients and the servers. Where we’re failing is in limiting the reach of that data. We all know that wireless networks can’t be physically delimited. They will go through our walls and windows. That’s the clincher – if we could only limit how far it can go, we’ve got it made.

Well, I’d like to put forth one approach to doing this – and you’re probably already catching on, which is great! We need to come up with a hardware wireless access point or gateway that can act as a GPS transmitter. It will act as a central point, or antenna, and will broadcast its availability, along with GPS coordinates, to the clients. Here we can actually break this into two subs:

  1. We can program a map of our building or perimeter, into the wireless router/access point, and thus be able to allow or disallow clients to connect based on whether or not they are within our pre-determined perimeter. The clients would also need to have some sort of GPS functionality programmed into their wireless cards, so they can talk back about their location to the router. This, coupled with MAC filtering, would act as a wonderful physical barrier.
  2. We can come up with an additional hardware component – let’s call them perimeter delimiters – that we can stick (as guideposts) at the corners or our surface area that we want to cover. They would serve two purposes: would bounce wireless traffic back to the central router, and would determine whether or not a client that is trying to connect to the router is outside or inside our perimeter. This would eliminate the need of coming up with special wireless cards that have integrated GPS functionality. These “perimeter delimiters” would determine how far or how close a device is from the central router (based on the strength of the connection signal) and would then make a yes/no decision about whether to let that client connect or not.

Given that GPS positioning is fairly accurate (within 3-6 feet, at any rate), these methods would allow us to safely shut out unallowed devices from connecting.

You could say, yes, that may be true, but we still have a problem with those people would would listen in on our wireless traffic! Maybe, but I think I may have a solution for that as well. Let’s take these same perimeter delimiters, and let’s give them a different purpose. Instead of acting as wireless traffic mirrors, they would act as wireless traffic disrupters! We could let them be unidirectional antennas that would emit the opposite waveforms of our wireless traffic outside our perimeter, and will thus effectively cancel out the wireless traffic that goes outside our perimeter. This works along the same lines as radar jamming. Our perimeter delimiters would listen in on all of our wireless traffic in the area, then flood the external perimeter (through unidirectional antennas – which are the key) with the exact opposite waveforms.

Now let’s deal with data encryption. We’ve all seen that really expensive encryption hardware is not the answer. Just look at the Texas Instruments debacle that’s recently made the news with the car key chip. That’s not to say that we don’t need hardware encryption. We do, but we shouldn’t rely solely on hardware. I think we should also use software. Here’s what I mean. We now have all sorts of encryption methods: WEP, WPA, etc. The problem is that most of the hardware out there can only use one sort of encryption at a time. What we really need is the ability to come up with a different lock and key encryption method every time a device connects to a wireless router or access point. We can do this by first varying the encryption methods used for every connect, and also by varying the encryption methods used for portions of the data. We should also be able to insert bogus data inbetween our data bits, and by labeling them with a different key every time, allow the client and server to delete them out of the traffic and thus understand each other. We should also be able to vary the amounts of data we encrypt through a particular method, and the amounts of bogus data we insert between the real data bits. The router can come up with a particular ratio for all these combinations at the time of the connect. That’s what I mean by a lock and key method. We should also be able to randomly change how often the lock and key are changed while the device is connected to the network. By making multiple components of the encryption method random – and at random times – this makes it extremely difficult to listen in on our traffic.

Will this slow down the speed of our connections? Yes, but in some situations, it’s worth it. Ideally, we should be able to tone down the strength of our encryption on the home devices – and thus gain back our speed – but it should be coded in, just in case we need it.

Standard
Thoughts

A better way to store and install printer drivers

How many of us have been irked by the fact that we had to always install printer drivers for our printing devices?

I think printers should store common printer drivers in on-board flash memory chips, and should be programmed to allow us to install the drivers directly from the printer, thus eliminating the need for driver CDs, which always have a way of getting lost. Along with the drivers, the printers would also install software that would check for driver updates on the manufacturer’s website, and would automatically install the updates to the computer as well as to the printer’s flash memory, thus ensuring that the drivers are kept up to date in both locations.

Standard