Technology

The Imitation Game: Turing’s Analogy of Gaming and AI Theory

December 30, 2015 Movies Technology

The Imitation Game produces an engrossing setting in a chamber with Detective Nock questioning Alan Turing, where he defines the theories of gaming and AI. The detective is clearly bewildered by the mathematical brilliance of his respondent. Alan Turing is widely considered as the father of theoretical computer science and artificial intelligence today.

Turing seems to ostensibly denote the inadequacy of humanity about tolerating an individual’s right to freedom (a reference to his homosexuality) while harbouring a surprising curiosity in machine behaviour to quantify its emotions.

(Very well done Benedict Cumberbatch!)

Detective Nock: Can machines think?
Turing: Oh, so you’ve read some of my published works?
Detective Nock: What makes you say that?
Turing: Well, because I’m sitting in a police station, accused of entreating a young man to touch my p**** and you just asked me if machines can think.
Detective Nock: Well, can they?
Turing: Could machines ever think as human beings do? Most people say not.
Detective Nock: You’re not most people.
Turing: Well, the problem is you’re…asking a stupid question.
Detective Nock: I am?
Turing: Of course machines… can’t think as people do.
A machine is different… from a person. Hence, they think differently.
The interesting question is, just because something, uh,
thinks differently from you, does that mean it’s not thinking?
Well, we allow for humans to have such divergences from one another.
You like strawberries, I hate ice-skating,
you… cry at sad films, I… am allergic to pollen.
What is the point of-of different tastes, different… preferences
if not to say that our brains work differently, that we think differently?
And if we can say that about one another, then why can’t we say
the same thing for brains… built of copper and wire, steel?
And that’s…
Detective Nock: this big paper you wrote? What’s it called?
Turing: ”The Imitation Game.”
Detective Nock: Right, that’s…that’s what it’s about?
Turing: Would you like to play?
Detective Nock: Play?
Turing: It’s a game. A test of sorts.
For determining whether something is a…a machine or a human being.
Detective Nock: How do I play?
Turing: Well, there’s a judge and a subject, and…the judge asks questions,
and, depending on the subject’s answers, determines who he is talking with…
what he is talking with, and, um…
All you have to do is ask me a question.
Detective Nock: What did you do during the war?
Turing: I worked in a radio factory.
Detective Nock: What did you really do during the war?
Turing: (laughs softly) Are you paying attention?

Moonraker

Moonraker: How This 70s Movie Demonstrated The Technology of Tomorrow

December 24, 2015 Movies Technology

Though personally not a Star Wars fan beyond its futuristic innovations, I coincidentally chanced upon Moonraker which is also heavily influenced from the science fiction genre. And it’s quite unimaginable that James Bond could also be cast in a space-age flick diverging from what Ian Fleming had imagined for James Bond in his book Moonraker which was published back in 1955.

It was the 70s when Moonraker gave us distinct clues of the automation and mechanics coming to us in the 21st century. Equally pioneering if not more, than the Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope which was released to an outstanding box-office collection in 1977 which prompted the producers of James Bond to review. Although for the Stars Wars series since the plot and characters had galactic representation the makers could go over-the-top with the weapons and humanoids. In contrast, being a Bond flick Moonraker’s plot had to be deeply entrenched with the human civilization theme while any technological innovations had to echo with the real world. Some of that space technology has either been popularized or retired or is in the process of being modernized today. Sure Bond gadgets are exaggerated functionally in the series but read on if you are just as curious to know about Moonraker’s tech offerings which are remarkable for the era when it was released. It’s an account of where fiction meets with reality at the horizon called ‘cinema’.

The Concorde and the Space Shuttle
It featured the Concorde (but the landing in Rio De Janeiro was off beat?). The supersonic Concorde flight and the Space Shuttle technology are definitely the biggest scientific innovations and suited the futuristic theme of the movie – it’s ironic that both the services (or should I say ‘technologies’) are now considered obsolete and have been thoughtfully retired. It’s also intriguing that the movie featured a fully functional space shuttle (named Moonraker) much before NASA had even conducted its first orbital test flight of the original space shuttle.

Drax Industries and Space Entrepreneurship
A mid-air space shuttle hijack prompts MI6 to investigate the incident and 007 is chosen for the job. The trail leads to Drax Industries and its billionaire owner Hugo Drax while unearthing his wicked plans. Not only did Drax build his own Moonraker shuttles but also had the groundwork to support their launch from the Amazon rain forests. This will sound familiar to the business model which Elon Musk has successfully created with SpaceX (except for launching rockets from the Amazon jungles which is never happening.) Entrepreneurship in space technology wasn’t even considered in the 70s when NASA and other government agencies around the world headed research and held rocket engineering secrets. Despite Drax Industries being a fictitious entity, it introduced to the world the concept of space entrepreneurship and deep-space colonization as a viable alternative for the future of humanity.

The Space Station
This brainchild of Hugo Drax wasn’t surprising considering that the Soviets had already launched the Salyut program in 1971. What was fascinating though was Hugo Drax’s space station had the most modern design and was technologically more advanced than the modular space stations we are used to seeing today at the International Space Station (ISS). The ISS doesn’t have a ‘zero gravity’ setting enabling the astronauts to walk normally like Drax’s space station. So maybe this was a bit exaggerated! The most ambitious feature I thought was the simultaneous docking of the Moonrakers – 6 at a time, to bring in supplies to the station, which could become a remote possibility in the distant future for the ISS.

In Conclusion
The producers of James Bond pushed to develop Moonraker ahead of For Your Eyes Only after the overwhelming response to the Star Wars and the space-age genre. The comparison with Star Wars is thus obvious. However the technology from Moonraker was deployed sooner than Star Wars, even though I believe that the AI/humanoid theme from Star Wars is priceless and requires more research before it can be realistically deployed. This is not to suggest that Star Wars isn’t an entertaining movie series. But to realize that James Bond also went into outer space to save humanity, and that Moonraker was this sci-fi show uncovering some breakthrough technological innovations in the 70s, is personally gratifying to note.

Free The Apple Watch

December 10, 2015 Technology

The Apple Watch was perfectly poised to sweep the industry. It had the goodness of the iPhone/Mac kitty, mainly the apps, the amazing product design and the indisputable quality of the Apple brand. Reasons which are enough for a device like the Apple Watch to own the industry which hadn’t seen much innovation in some time. Some of the early entrants to this arena were no match to the promise of experience and the technology which only Apple could deliver with its first wearable device. Sadly when it arrived it wasn’t the product we had anticipated, it wasn’t an ‘independent’ product. And let me explain.

The rich product basket of Apple including the iMac, the iPod, the iPad, and, the iPhone have existed as sovereign personalities with its own audience. The iPad, iPhone and iPod need the Mac/PC only for syncing content and are pretty much independent devices. Apple with its vast design experience curated an entire domain of great product design with hardware and software. Beginning with the unibody design and later with Yosemite by transforming the skeuomorphic UI with the flat design language. Other features such as HandOff and Continuity, and introduction of Maps, Notes, and Notifications on OSX which brought about a wonderful cohesion of OSX/iOS environments. All this and yet it did not take away the freedom of its users to work independently with these devices. Until the Watch came along. The graphic depicting the Apple devices isn’t honest to the Watch which can’t work without the iPhone.

The Watch as a wearable gadget with a small form factor meant that it would not naturally transition the rich cohesion of experience of the OSX/iOS devices. Although this does not make it an exceptional case when it comes to making it self-reliant within its functions and features. There are other watch devices today which do not need the phone support for offering a better user experience. And sure they may not tote a rich app ‘garden’ like the App Store. For now, let’s free the Watch from the clutches of the iPhone.

Apple’s product design cycle is unclear, if one is to understand that the earlier design iterations of the iPhone and iPad missed some essential features that were common to the devices of its kind. Considering this, the Watch isn’t freewheeling so soon until about a few more design iterations. Let’s hope the wait isn’t too long and painful.

Design Case Against Gmail Tabs

November 21, 2015 Design Technology

Gmail Tabs was meant to handle email clutter in the primary inbox and optimize the email experience. Surely enough it was an exciting news for Gmail fans, and before I knew I had activated the feature on my account. So now I had five tabs (or inboxes) in Gmail where emails from different sources were automatically redirected into Primary, Social, Promotions, Updates or Forums tabs. You could also drag an email to any of the tabs, so that Gmail could recognize and deliver future emails to its respective inbox tab. And I was happy with this arrangement until I realized it had started to cause me inconvenience in managing different tabs or inboxes at the same. Using the Gmail app on iOS correspondingly was even more annoying because it increased my time (tap ratio) to reach specific emails and take action. As time went by I cared less about prioritizing my emails and more about organizing my emails. In fact I lost complete control over my emails and conversations and decided to do something about it.

There are email updates such as newsletters and account details, new sign ups, login notifications, verify email address, et al., and social media messages such as Twitter and Facebook notifications and then Spam, they all could be deleted or preserved (labeled appropriately and/or Archived) depending upon the value of the information.

In that sense Gmail Tabs brought a behavioural change in email interaction. There was a logical movement of the eye (scanning) in the traditional email list navigation model following a Receive > Read > Act > Delete/Preserve task flow. In other words conversations were easily identifiable through a comprehensive visible list of messages.

Traditional Inbox

Traditional Inbox with Email Listing (in red)

When Gmail Tabs introduced several inboxes within a large mailbox scanning became a matter of choice. And since each tab represented an inbox with emails delivered in volume at the same time, the focus shifted to reading emails in the Primary inbox (since they tended to represent real email senders), while taking it easy on the rest of the tabs. So when tabs presented multiple choices to the user it inhibited the person to make a decision.

Priority Inbox Feature

Gmail’s inbox feature with tabs (& unread emails)

Here’s why I believe Gmail Tabs was a design failure over the traditional Inbox design. This feature by its inherent network of tabs hid information and persuaded users to ignore emails and not motivate them for further action. For example receiving email in any of the tabs other than the Primary mailbox would either be read or ignored but never deleted. And storing all those trivial emails not only bloated my Gmail account it also overshadowed important conversations and added to the clutter.

For me nothing works like the original inbox mail listing feature now that I’m using it again. I can now control whether emails stay or go to the Bin the minute I receive them. The list design pattern provides early clues on information and doesn’t afford for conversations to hide behind tabs. Now that the original Inbox listing is back for me I noticed a ton of unread emails. So excuse me, while I clear this email mess!

iPad Pro and Apple Pencil – First Impressions

November 16, 2015 Design Technology

With loads of emotions, I had been awaiting the iPad Pro and Apple Pencil launch since Apple announced the breakthrough products in September 2015. The day finally arrived last weekend when I visited the Apple Store.

Disappointingly, my first impression when I held the iPad Pro was it just felt like a normal iPad! It wasn’t anywhere closer to the picture I was harbouring in my mind, of a large sheet of fine glass and slightly bulky device. Somewhere that tweet about the iPad Pro form factor feeling like an iPad Air 2 came true. Or maybe what I was feeling with the iPad Pro was a victory for Apple’s ingenuity in industrial design! Making something as powerful as the iPad Pro and letting the ergonomics sync with the present generation iPads. The new Smart Keyboard as well is a well designed and an exclusive accessory for the Pro. On the flip side we will have to wait for the next iPad Pro version to see the breakthrough 3D Touch technology at work which made the iPhone 6S series special in so many ways.

The Pencil’s story is quite different. I had used the FiftyThree Pencil last year but wasn’t too happy with the pressure sensitivity and the woeful response of the ‘stylus’ on the iPad. It required me to hold the tip in a certain way to touch the screen to draw something. The tip was rubbery and basically the experience never felt closer to a real pencil which I was initially expecting when I bought the product. The Apple Pencil feels every bit like the real stuff. The tip is hard and sensitive and detects the pressure points quite beautifully. It works even when you tilt it. The Pencil and iPad Pro combination is exciting – both are meant to work together actually, and a perfect platform for artists or architects to run their imagination wild. I’m already foreseeing a new genre of digital artistic wave being generated as a result of this innovative product from Apple. Now with Evernote supporting Apple Pencil it’s no doubt a fantastic device for everyone (and doodling takes a whole new meaning). I can’t wait to see what the upgrade for these devices has to offer.

“We didn’t really do a stylus, we did a Pencil. The traditional stylus is fat, it has really bad latency so you’re sketching here and it’s filling the line in somewhere behind. You can’t sketch with something like that. You need something that mimics the look and feel of the pencil itself or you’re not going to replace it. We’re not trying to replace finger touch, we’re complementing it with the Pencil.” – Tim Cook