Lifeboat Foundation

Game-changing technologies can be a waste of money or a competitive advantage. It depends on the technology and the organization.

It seems like the term “game-changing” gets tossed around a lot lately. This is particularly true with respect to new technologies. But what does the term mean, what are the implications, and how can you measure it?

With regarding to what it means, I like the MacMillan dictionary definition for game-changing. It is defined as “Completely changing the way that something is done, thought about, or made.” The reason I like this definition is it captures the transformational nature of what springs to mind when I hear the term game-changing. This should be just what it says. Not just a whole new ball game, but a whole new type of game entirely.

Every industry is unique. What is a game-changer for one, might only be a minor disruption or improvement for another. For example, the internal combustion engine was a game-changer for the transportation industry. It was important, though less of a game-changer for the asphalt industry due to secondary effect of increased demand for paved roads.

Continue reading “Game-Changing Technologies” »

by Sean Gallagher — ars technica
Augmented reality (AR) is a technology that has been on the cusp of becoming the next big thing for over 20 years. But the technology—the projection of data or digital imagery over real-world objects—has largely remained the stuff of fighter cockpits at the high end and of mobile games and art projects on the low. The promise of Google Glass—real augmented reality for the masses—failed to materialize.

That doesn’t mean the technology won’t fly at all. While many organizations experimented with Glass, other devices already in the hands—and on the heads—of companies and software developers have been pushing forward augmented reality in multiple industries. Work is being done today to integrate corporate cloud applications and data from intelligent machines connected to the “Internet of Things” into applications for mobile and wearable devices. And all this could help make humans on the factory floor, on the flight line, in hospitals, and in the field more effective and efficient. With Microsoft’s HoloLens promising a standard development platform for AR, the cost of building those applications could plummet in the next few years.Read more

By Stephen Cass with Charles Q. Choi — Spectrum

It seemed like the nascent augmented-reality industry was on a roller coaster at the start of the year. Things looked bad when Google announced that it was terminating sales of its Glass headset in favor of developing some new version to be announced at some time in the future. (Possibly in a galaxy far, far away.) But then the future looked bright again when Microsoft unveiled its HoloLens AR headset at a razzle-dazzle press event in late January.

But the truth is that well before the debut of HoloLens, the AR ecosystem had been moving away from Google’s model of always-available wearable computing and toward the idea that AR headsets should be—at least for now—something you use only for specific tasks. At the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas just after New Year’s, most of the capabilities advertised a few weeks later by Microsoft for its HoloLens prototypes were already on display on the show floor (albeit spread among several exhibitors), and they were mostly doing industrial and enterprise work.
Read more

Jake Swearingen — The Atlantic

Since its debut in 2012, Google Glass always faced a strong headwind. Even on celebrities it looked, well, dorky. The device itself, once released in the wild, was seen as half-baked, and developers lost interest. The press, already leery, was quick to dog pile, especially when Glass’s users quickly became Glass’s own worst enemy.

Many early adopters who got their hands on the device (and paid $1,500 for the privilege under the Google Explorer program) were underwhelmed. “I found that it was not very useful for very much, and it tended to disturb people around me that I have this thing,” said James Katz, Boston University’s director of emerging media studies, to MIT Technology Review.
Read more

The study of consciousness and what makes us individuals is a topic filled with complexities. From a neuroscience perspective, consciousness is derived from a self-model as a unitary structure that shapes our perceptions, decisions and feelings. There is a tendency to jump to the conclusion with this model that mankind is being defined as self-absorbed and only being in it for ourselves in this life. Although that may be partially true, this definition of consciousness doesn’t necessarily address the role of morals and how that is shaped into our being. In the latest addition to The Galactic Public Archives, Dr. Ken Hayworth tackles the philosophical impact that technologies have on our lives.

Our previous two films feature Dr. Hayworth extrapolating about what radical new technologies in neuroscience could eventually produce. In a hypothetical world where mind upload is possible and we could create a perfect replica of ourselves, how would one personally identify? If this copy has the same memories and biological components, our method of understanding consciousness would inevitably shift. But when it comes down it, if we were put in a situation where it would be either you or the replica – it’s natural evolutionary instinct to want to save ourselves even if the other is an exact copy. This notion challenges the idea that our essence is defined by our life experiences because many different people can have identical experiences yet react differently.

Hayworth explains, that although there is an instinct for self-survival, humanity for the most part, has a basic understanding not to cause harm upon others. This is because morals are not being developed in the “hard drive” of your life experiences; instead our morals are tied to the very idea of someone just being a conscious and connected member of this world. Hayworth rationalizes that once we accept our flawed intuition of self, humanity will come to a spiritual understanding that the respect we give to others for simply possessing a reflection of the same kind of consciousness will be the key to us identifying our ultimate interconnectedness.

Continue reading “Dr. Ken Hayworth, Part 3: If we can build a brain, what is the future of I?” »

By Davide Sher - 3D Printing Industry

Today, Microsoft held a conference to announce a number releases related to the new Windows 10 operating system, but all eyes were on the HoloLens, which, in a way, is the company’s answer to the now defunct Google Glass and Facebook’s Oculus Rift. Looking at it from another standpoint, however, HoloLens is much more, and not just because of its envisioned 3D printing applications.

Continue reading “Cutting Edge Microsoft HoloLens is an Augmented Virtual Reality Computer for Your Face” »

By Jason Dorrier — Singulariy Hub

Television, cellphones, radio, WiFi—modern civilization converses in radio waves.

Most of us need some kind of device to translate the signals into something we can consume on a screen or through a speaker. But in the television show, Alphas, one of the characters, Gary Bell, can literally see and read electromagnetic waves.

Continue reading “Cyborg Superpower: Man Can Hear the Internet” »

By Adam Williams — Gizmag

The recently-unveiled Leia Display System (LDS) is a lot like a large touchscreen, but with one important difference: its screen is not solid, but rather made from mist. This means you can walk right through the screen, manipulate displayed images using hand gestures reminiscent of Minority Report, or even interact with the display using your whole body.

Read more

The headlines pound away at us day after day with ominous news. Ebola has the potential to spread around the globe through rapid transport on airplanes, trains and automobiles. The United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and other health experts do not recommend shutting down air travel from West Africa. “If you try to shut down air travel and sea travel, you risk affecting to a huge extent the economy, people’s livelihoods and their ability to get around without stopping the virus from traveling,” said Greg Hartl, a World Health Organization spokesperson.

In a recent poll, a majority of Americans believe air travel restrictions are a necessity to stop the spread of Ebola in the United States. In fact, 56 percent said the federal government should bar those who have “recently” been in Ebola nations from entering the U.S. It is obvious we must find better ways to use technology to our advantage to detect people who are showing symptoms of the virus. This is where augmented reality and wearable technology can improve our detection rate of sick people stricken with Ebola.

Currently Ebola screening is taking place at five United States airports: Newark, Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Washington. US government officials claim that 95% of travels from West Africa would go through those airports to enter the United States. Once a traveller passed a screener check-point, they would be free to enter the US without being monitored after that point.

Continue reading “Stopping the Spread of Ebola through Augmented Reality” »