http://gizmodo.com/5495796/gms-enhanced-windshield-uses-lasers-to-make-your-road-trips-safer
http://www.gizmag.com/gm-augmented-reality-windshield-research/14569/
Driving is the best way of transportation. In the United States, almost everyone depends on an automobile to travel from place to place. The more you drive the more experience you will have on the road. This is true if the visibility of driving is clear. Many Americans die from automobile accidents. Mostly driving while intoxicated, but the rest are not paying attention to the road or not able to see the road clearly. Luckily General Motors is working on an enhanced augmented windshield. The windshield has 4 cameras built in the car. It captures the driver's face and motion to highlight the road on the windshield so the driver can see what's ahead. Providing the utmost vision for the driver. He or she will more in likely not hit the curb or the side. It will decline accidents and provide more safe driving habits. Also the enhanced windshield can be linked with a gps which would highlight the landmark or building where your destination is. The laser generated system is under production and hopefully it will be in their automobile in the near future.
In my opinion, I like the idea of an enhanced windshield. They give a better look in to the future for driving. It would definitely encourage more drivers to drive out in the fog and heavy rain. Since this is an advantage more people would be using it for granted, especially the drunk drivers. I would assume that it would make no difference or not surprisingly increase the automobile death rate. All I can do is hope that people will use it responsibly and be able to use it sparingly so if the system breaks then they could use their own eyes to watch the road. The pros of this would be the mass roads and transportation that would make traveling easier. By the time the system is actually out, most of the country would be overpopulated, majority of the people would live in an urban area than a suburban area. Also, the tires and rims would not be worn out so quickly by not hitting the curb often. Many people who desire to find their destination only by looking at the windshield would hardly get lost. Overall, I agree with General Motors new contraption. If only they could speed up the process.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Blog 7
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8534969.stm
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/02/26/tattoo-removing-lasers-also-remove-grime-from-classic-works-of-art/
Ever thought about the tool that removes your unwanted tattoos? Well, did you know that it also removes dirt and grime from old famous paintings from centuries ago? Amazingly enough, that this laser ablation will be able to clean the masterpieces of art history. Not only canvases, but they can clean stone and metal artifacts. They have already cleaned Lorenzo Ghiberti’s gilded bronze panels Porta del Paradiso, or Gate of Paradise, and Donatello’s Renaissance bronze statue of David. Laser ablation is going to be a widespread for our precious ancient art. Even cleaning with a laser ablation is extremely more safer than a scapel cutting the layer grime or using chemicals. The reason why they would use a laser ablation than those traditional ones because chemicals makes reactions on the paintings. Within a year or so it could drastically altar the paintings. The laser ablation doesn't harm the painting as much as the traditional cleaning methods. Unless the user of the laser ablation is unexperienced then it can be quite harmful for the masterpiece. Dr. Siano mentions that this useful technique is not considered a micro-sandblasting which he is the professor of the Restoration School of the Opificio delle Pietre Dure in Florence. Such miraculous idea, there is always a downfall. When used for stone or metal, it became a little discolored. They solved it by letting the artifact underwater and applying the laser. Interestingly, it increased the rate of the laser. Especially archaeological silver and developed a mineral shell. Some would call it a micro-fragmentation or the micro-explosion. Hopefully in the future, they wish the laser ablation would be an accepted technique across the world.
In my personal opinion, I think it's a great idea to save our lovable artwork. I have a certain aspect with artwork. The art that is considered such a masterpiece should not be altered since dirt and grime is a natural occurance on artifacts. I would leave it alone. I love art as much as the next guy, but there is no reason for this obsession-compulsive disorder for art and it's history. When the art is not visible anymore then cleaning should be a must but we should not clean everything that we see fit. I hope they wont go into a spring cleaning with this outbreak of saving one of Donatello's artwork.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/02/26/tattoo-removing-lasers-also-remove-grime-from-classic-works-of-art/
Ever thought about the tool that removes your unwanted tattoos? Well, did you know that it also removes dirt and grime from old famous paintings from centuries ago? Amazingly enough, that this laser ablation will be able to clean the masterpieces of art history. Not only canvases, but they can clean stone and metal artifacts. They have already cleaned Lorenzo Ghiberti’s gilded bronze panels Porta del Paradiso, or Gate of Paradise, and Donatello’s Renaissance bronze statue of David. Laser ablation is going to be a widespread for our precious ancient art. Even cleaning with a laser ablation is extremely more safer than a scapel cutting the layer grime or using chemicals. The reason why they would use a laser ablation than those traditional ones because chemicals makes reactions on the paintings. Within a year or so it could drastically altar the paintings. The laser ablation doesn't harm the painting as much as the traditional cleaning methods. Unless the user of the laser ablation is unexperienced then it can be quite harmful for the masterpiece. Dr. Siano mentions that this useful technique is not considered a micro-sandblasting which he is the professor of the Restoration School of the Opificio delle Pietre Dure in Florence. Such miraculous idea, there is always a downfall. When used for stone or metal, it became a little discolored. They solved it by letting the artifact underwater and applying the laser. Interestingly, it increased the rate of the laser. Especially archaeological silver and developed a mineral shell. Some would call it a micro-fragmentation or the micro-explosion. Hopefully in the future, they wish the laser ablation would be an accepted technique across the world.
In my personal opinion, I think it's a great idea to save our lovable artwork. I have a certain aspect with artwork. The art that is considered such a masterpiece should not be altered since dirt and grime is a natural occurance on artifacts. I would leave it alone. I love art as much as the next guy, but there is no reason for this obsession-compulsive disorder for art and it's history. When the art is not visible anymore then cleaning should be a must but we should not clean everything that we see fit. I hope they wont go into a spring cleaning with this outbreak of saving one of Donatello's artwork.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Article Blog 6
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-02/tiny-armored-car-unveiled-indias-newest-anti-terror-weapon
http://www.dailymirror.ph/Feb-2010/Feb1910/week3.html
India has come up with a new type of vehicle. It is not for civilians like the Tata Nano. An armored car that is small enough to fit through the elevators and narrow hallways. It's called the ATAC. It's sold for $45,000 and the manufacturer is Metaltech Motor Bodies Pvt Ltd. The armor is not just bulletproof but also grenade proof. The window, crazy as this sounds, is also grenade proof. It was originally created for terrorists' attacks. The design was inspired by the 2008 terror where an Islamic insurgent held off Indian commandos in two luxerious hotels. They killed seventeen security perssonels and one hundred sixty-six civilians. The car has four firing ports in case of return fire. It offers more protection than bunker shields which are carried by the S.W.A.T. team. The speed is fitted for this armored car, 15 miles per hour and when it is fully charged it can run up to 6 hours.
There has been many cars out there that are armored like the hummer, but the ATAC is fitted for the scenario that happens frequently with India. India is a great beautiful country, but around it's borders there are many extremist Islams. They are what we call, terrorist. They, the terrorist, has held many hostages, bombings, and outrageous rampage. Luckily, they came up with the ATAC and this should bring down the casualties in India. In the United States, we would not use this as often as the Indians. The major cities like New York or San Francisco would be the ideal area but it's not that special here. I know its nothing to spectacular in technology, but life is important. To me, anything that is created to save one another is the best idea and concern.
http://www.dailymirror.ph/Feb-2010/Feb1910/week3.html
India has come up with a new type of vehicle. It is not for civilians like the Tata Nano. An armored car that is small enough to fit through the elevators and narrow hallways. It's called the ATAC. It's sold for $45,000 and the manufacturer is Metaltech Motor Bodies Pvt Ltd. The armor is not just bulletproof but also grenade proof. The window, crazy as this sounds, is also grenade proof. It was originally created for terrorists' attacks. The design was inspired by the 2008 terror where an Islamic insurgent held off Indian commandos in two luxerious hotels. They killed seventeen security perssonels and one hundred sixty-six civilians. The car has four firing ports in case of return fire. It offers more protection than bunker shields which are carried by the S.W.A.T. team. The speed is fitted for this armored car, 15 miles per hour and when it is fully charged it can run up to 6 hours.
There has been many cars out there that are armored like the hummer, but the ATAC is fitted for the scenario that happens frequently with India. India is a great beautiful country, but around it's borders there are many extremist Islams. They are what we call, terrorist. They, the terrorist, has held many hostages, bombings, and outrageous rampage. Luckily, they came up with the ATAC and this should bring down the casualties in India. In the United States, we would not use this as often as the Indians. The major cities like New York or San Francisco would be the ideal area but it's not that special here. I know its nothing to spectacular in technology, but life is important. To me, anything that is created to save one another is the best idea and concern.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Blog 4
http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/blog2/index.php/hydrogen-vehicles/seymourpowell-aircruise-hydrogen-powered-airship-concept-unveiled/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP15Vgt55Gk
http://www.earthtechling.com/2010/02/traveling-the-luxury-skies-the-eco-friendly-deluxe-airship-way/
Seymourpowell is a British company who was commissioned by Samsung Construction and Trading to design a futuristic eco-friendly transportation unit. They come up with a hotel aircruise, similar to an air balloon, that is uses natural resources and hydrogen. The hotel would be able to go to 90 miles per hour. The design for the aircruise is meant for only 100 passengers who are willing to stay in a luxerious hotel. The build is about 800 feet tall floating above beautiful landscapes and through large cities. There would be ten apartments. It would have a bar, lounging and dining. If the project is a go, hopefully this will be out by 2015. There are some concept design images of the hotel which i posted it as a link.
In my honest opinion, I like the idea of a futuristic air-transportation luxery hotel. I can imagine myself enjoying my dinner while watching us rise over the Taj Mahal or relaxing in the lounge area while we float around the Tibet mountain. I know I'll end up being broke, but the trip seems to be worth every penny. I'm in dire hope to see this project end up doing well so I can be still young enough to experience it. 90 miles per hour is perfect just to relax and enjoy the view of nature. The con is, most people do not have that much time to be lollygagging. To me, the hotel would only be a vacation or a honeymoon, but nothing else. Surely, it was built for adults only since their concepts shows very exquisite furniture and appliances. So I would not bring any children. Since there are apartment as well as a hotel, it can be boisterous and exasperating to the residents since the hotel would be filled with rich drunks. Overall, I must say if Britain can come up with a hydrogen eco-friendly hotel that travels through natural resources then I will have money put down to see this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP15Vgt55Gk
http://www.earthtechling.com/2010/02/traveling-the-luxury-skies-the-eco-friendly-deluxe-airship-way/
Seymourpowell is a British company who was commissioned by Samsung Construction and Trading to design a futuristic eco-friendly transportation unit. They come up with a hotel aircruise, similar to an air balloon, that is uses natural resources and hydrogen. The hotel would be able to go to 90 miles per hour. The design for the aircruise is meant for only 100 passengers who are willing to stay in a luxerious hotel. The build is about 800 feet tall floating above beautiful landscapes and through large cities. There would be ten apartments. It would have a bar, lounging and dining. If the project is a go, hopefully this will be out by 2015. There are some concept design images of the hotel which i posted it as a link.
In my honest opinion, I like the idea of a futuristic air-transportation luxery hotel. I can imagine myself enjoying my dinner while watching us rise over the Taj Mahal or relaxing in the lounge area while we float around the Tibet mountain. I know I'll end up being broke, but the trip seems to be worth every penny. I'm in dire hope to see this project end up doing well so I can be still young enough to experience it. 90 miles per hour is perfect just to relax and enjoy the view of nature. The con is, most people do not have that much time to be lollygagging. To me, the hotel would only be a vacation or a honeymoon, but nothing else. Surely, it was built for adults only since their concepts shows very exquisite furniture and appliances. So I would not bring any children. Since there are apartment as well as a hotel, it can be boisterous and exasperating to the residents since the hotel would be filled with rich drunks. Overall, I must say if Britain can come up with a hydrogen eco-friendly hotel that travels through natural resources then I will have money put down to see this.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Blog 3
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/apple-unveils-ipad-tablet-computer/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/188073/apple_ipad_reviews_the_critics_weigh_in.html
Apple's new technology that is about to hit the market is the iPad. The iPad is a 9.7 inch LED backlit LCD that contains either sixteen, thirty-two, or sixty-four gigabytes. It has either wi-fi or 3g data plan from AT&T. It can hold itunes, photos, video, and applications from apple app store. The iPad's processor is a custom 1 gigahertz Apple A4. It has speakers, microphone, compass, QWERTY keyboard, and an accelerometer. Basically an iPad is a netbook created by Apple Inc. The price ranges from $499 to $829.
Apple has created our electronics for the past decade. We, the consumers, eat it up. Everything that apple pulls out of their heads, we pull out our wallets. I don't see why people should be following today's technology. Don't get me wrong, I do like Apple and yes, I have a several of their products like their iPod touch and iPod nano. The fact that their old makes me not fit in to that category. Only because I don't waste my money when it came out because it would be cheaper when the next model comes in. I have use to have a mp3 player, but it broke so I bought an iPod touch. An iPod touch has been out for 3 years when I bought mine. I paid a fraction of what I've could've paid. This explanation is an excuse for my purchases from Apple and consumerism. People buy numerous electronics, but is there a need for an extra laptop? I have a desktop computer and a laptop, but my laptop is for portable paperwork. If I bought a iPad it would be like a high processor iTouch except it has a bigger LED screen or a netbook without a keypad. Why waste my money on a gadget that doesn't do as much as I wanted to but it just looks pretty. So pointless and improvident to pay such a thing. Also, the iPad doesn't have 4:3 aspect ratio, a HDMI port, a camera, and it can not multi-task. Plus, the iPad cost more then some laptops which the laptops can do more then any iPad could. I will conclude that there isn't a reason why people should get an iPad or anything of that sort. Be resourceful and economical, don't follow technology trends.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/188073/apple_ipad_reviews_the_critics_weigh_in.html
Apple's new technology that is about to hit the market is the iPad. The iPad is a 9.7 inch LED backlit LCD that contains either sixteen, thirty-two, or sixty-four gigabytes. It has either wi-fi or 3g data plan from AT&T. It can hold itunes, photos, video, and applications from apple app store. The iPad's processor is a custom 1 gigahertz Apple A4. It has speakers, microphone, compass, QWERTY keyboard, and an accelerometer. Basically an iPad is a netbook created by Apple Inc. The price ranges from $499 to $829.
Apple has created our electronics for the past decade. We, the consumers, eat it up. Everything that apple pulls out of their heads, we pull out our wallets. I don't see why people should be following today's technology. Don't get me wrong, I do like Apple and yes, I have a several of their products like their iPod touch and iPod nano. The fact that their old makes me not fit in to that category. Only because I don't waste my money when it came out because it would be cheaper when the next model comes in. I have use to have a mp3 player, but it broke so I bought an iPod touch. An iPod touch has been out for 3 years when I bought mine. I paid a fraction of what I've could've paid. This explanation is an excuse for my purchases from Apple and consumerism. People buy numerous electronics, but is there a need for an extra laptop? I have a desktop computer and a laptop, but my laptop is for portable paperwork. If I bought a iPad it would be like a high processor iTouch except it has a bigger LED screen or a netbook without a keypad. Why waste my money on a gadget that doesn't do as much as I wanted to but it just looks pretty. So pointless and improvident to pay such a thing. Also, the iPad doesn't have 4:3 aspect ratio, a HDMI port, a camera, and it can not multi-task. Plus, the iPad cost more then some laptops which the laptops can do more then any iPad could. I will conclude that there isn't a reason why people should get an iPad or anything of that sort. Be resourceful and economical, don't follow technology trends.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Blog 2
http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/6273-amazon-kindle-academic-review
http://www.amazon.com/Kindle-Amazons-Original-Wireless-generation/dp/B000FI73MA
There is this new thing on Amazon called Kindle. Not the ebook store but a wireless reading device. You can save PDF files and tons of ebooks. You can as well highlight the context of the PDF file. The lighting and format of the screen is paper-like visual so no more straining of the eyes from the bright light of monitors. Its big enough to be a decent sized book but small and convenient enough to carry around since it was less than a pound. It has a keyboard and a wireless access to amazon where you can buy a ebook instantly. The Internet access is free without any data plan. You can receive newspapers, blogs and so forth. Holds up to 200 titles and the batter life is sufficient. Quite the technology to have if you are a reader and a student.
In Chris Grainger's blog, he mentions that Kindle doesn't have all of the books you would like and that is understandable since its recently new, but that's a huge setback for me of getting one. Actually, I don't want one at all. Even if it was given to me I wouldn't take it. I'm quite the reader and i don't like ebooks. Given the fact its easier just to log on and start reading without the burden of carrying it around, but where's the pride of holding a lively book. I can hold a kindle but there's no title cover for the book I'm reading. Which I have struck so many conversations because I bring my book and people notice what book I'm reading. My friends are also big readers and we at times trade books. I don't think we can trade e-books also trading a kindle would definitely be a horrible idea. I find it hard to bring a kindle outside since it was a big investment like an ipod. A real book cost around twenty to thirty dollars and I'm not worried if it was rained on, sat on, scratched, and I could go on for hours. I see the book as a trophy but a Kindle or ebook is just an electronic file or a device. Don't get me wrong, I love technology but traditionally books has always been as ink on paper, even the drafts of writers. So why ruin all the paperbacks and hardbacks that's been produced for the readers to a device that holds ebooks.
http://www.amazon.com/Kindle-Amazons-Original-Wireless-generation/dp/B000FI73MA
There is this new thing on Amazon called Kindle. Not the ebook store but a wireless reading device. You can save PDF files and tons of ebooks. You can as well highlight the context of the PDF file. The lighting and format of the screen is paper-like visual so no more straining of the eyes from the bright light of monitors. Its big enough to be a decent sized book but small and convenient enough to carry around since it was less than a pound. It has a keyboard and a wireless access to amazon where you can buy a ebook instantly. The Internet access is free without any data plan. You can receive newspapers, blogs and so forth. Holds up to 200 titles and the batter life is sufficient. Quite the technology to have if you are a reader and a student.
In Chris Grainger's blog, he mentions that Kindle doesn't have all of the books you would like and that is understandable since its recently new, but that's a huge setback for me of getting one. Actually, I don't want one at all. Even if it was given to me I wouldn't take it. I'm quite the reader and i don't like ebooks. Given the fact its easier just to log on and start reading without the burden of carrying it around, but where's the pride of holding a lively book. I can hold a kindle but there's no title cover for the book I'm reading. Which I have struck so many conversations because I bring my book and people notice what book I'm reading. My friends are also big readers and we at times trade books. I don't think we can trade e-books also trading a kindle would definitely be a horrible idea. I find it hard to bring a kindle outside since it was a big investment like an ipod. A real book cost around twenty to thirty dollars and I'm not worried if it was rained on, sat on, scratched, and I could go on for hours. I see the book as a trophy but a Kindle or ebook is just an electronic file or a device. Don't get me wrong, I love technology but traditionally books has always been as ink on paper, even the drafts of writers. So why ruin all the paperbacks and hardbacks that's been produced for the readers to a device that holds ebooks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)