A few notes all across the board.

First, a while ago I read this interview with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. He expresses confusion that Google seems to be abandoning Android as a netbook OS in favor of Chrome OS. I was a little confused about that too, but Chrome OS does make more sense on a non-touch screen netbook than Android does. Also, the idea that an OS is really a browser is something Ubuntu needs to start thinking about. Windows 7′s search-able start menu is arguably their best feature (yes, Vista had it too).

On my honor, I was just thinking about this very thing, a watch that could connect to a smartphone via bluetooth. This prototype is for Blackberry only, it isn’t available now but may be someday. With the very long range of Bluetooth 2.0 this is a really good idea.

Verizon is blasting the iPhone in their new “Droid Can” ads in favor of the Android OS. Now it’s rumored a 4G iPhone might pop up on Verizon. At least you’re not burning any bridges…

Android is getting the advantage in the cell phone market now. It’s not locked to any hardware, so people can access the large app base with the form factor they most want. Even Maemo, which I think is better, only shows up on Nokia phones despite it’s being open source. I was hoping the Nokia N900 would position itself against the iPhone the way Verizon is doing with the Droid ads, but Nokia might already be a lost cause. Their last quarter reports are pretty bad. With smartphones, at least.

Android really is the techno-hydra. It’s non-exclusive and I don’t think Nokia can beat it in the US when their smartphone will only be fully compatible with one carrier. I mean really, the N900′s success in the US seems to be dependent on how well T-Mobile’s Project Dark goes. I don’t know if I like that very much.

I’m fine with using Android over Windows Mobile or the iPhone, but I really, really would like to see Nokia and Maemo get the success it deserves.

Lark

Although I’m a bit of a skeptic overall, I’m comfortable with fingerprint evidence being used in court. That given, I think we all know that it’s possible for a clean fingerprint to be lifted off one source and conveniently planted somewhere else.

Guess what? Something much more convincing is now possible. It involves DNA evidence. Of course, you could always find DNA in somebody’s home and plant it in a crime scene, but in this case scientists can remove the DNA that currently resides in blood or saliva and replace it with a match to other DNA that was taken from, say, a drinking glass or a cigarette butt. Same blood sample, different DNA. How are we supposed to build a justice system around that?

It’s no secret I’m a fan of Google and the services they provide. I don’t even mind that they use my information serve me better ads–I’ve actually started coming across more and more ads that help me find things I’ve been looking for. However, there are lines that need to be drawn. The more and more services Google provides, the more important it is that we ensure that Google protects our privacy.

The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) has an interesting article about this, with a form you should fill out to let Google know how they need to handle your private information. The EFF writes:

You shouldn’t be forced to pay for digital books with your privacy. Tell Google it needs to develop a robust privacy policy that gives you at least as much privacy in books online as you have in your neighborhood library or bookstore.

Security used to mean keeping your important personal documents in a safe. Now all our personal information is sent through emails, internet voice services, or to online backup utilities. All this redundancy is great–if you’re careful, a fire doesn’t mean you lose copies of documents, or photos, or music. And it’s a lot easier to search files on a computer than files in a cabinet. However, digital information is exponentially harder to keep track of. As more of our information becomes digital, it becomes increasingly important that we have more effective privacy policies.

Google is collecting such information. We need to make sure this information is safe. Go to the website. Fill out the form.

Lark

Two words: cell phones.

That is all,

Lark

Early adopters get screwed. Still not convinced? I’ll bet you are, but let me elaborate more, this time using the mp3 as an example.

I posted on twitter two days ago that I’ve never used, or even owned, a dual-layer dvdr disc. This is on my mind because I’m going to have to start using them in the near future, expanding my DVD authoring skills.

As I explained, I’ve never needed a DL DVDr. I’ve always bought the biggest USB drives I could find, and I use a media center PC to play movies, not a DVD player. This means I’ve never needed to burn 8GB on a disc, I could just throw it on a thumb drive, and I could play videos off the thumb drive on my television just fine.

However, looking at these thumb drives, I’m reminded of a rule of thumb, especially in regards to technology: Early adopters get screwed.

Of course I’ve been using hyperbole. Early adopters pay more at first, and get less convenient technology for that money, but they also reap the benefits of the most recent develpments. Hell, they’re partly responsible for the increase of technology.

There are no absolutes. Sometimes early adopters come out ahead. For instance, web domains. If you looked ahead and snagged mcrosoft.com, or nbc.com, etc, you probably made some nice cash on the re-sales.

Certain cars are worth more now than they were originally, but not many. A lot of old vinyl records could probably be sold for more than was originally paid for them, as could be said about anything nostalgiac.

And phone numbers. Try getting a phone number that spells anything nowadays. I just tried, with my Google Voice account. No luck. So if you’ve got a good one, congratulations.

Of course, the last people on the bandwagon, the people who sneered at the idea of the personal computer originally, can now afford with one week’s pay a laptop hundreds of times more powerful than those bulky first PCs.

There are some exceptions, but they’re few and far between. Then again, the benefit of early adoption is inherent. The commands, “cut,” and “paste”? Those terms used to refer to physical actions. When there were no word processors, you’d type on a typewriter, then white-out, cut, paste, and re-copy your documents. The first computers may have taken multiple floppy disks to hold one document, but they were way better than the alternative. Early adopters only seem to be getting screwed when looking back from the convenience of the present, never when contrasted against the only other options at the time. This is the way technology works, and it’s the way it always will be.

Lark

I have to say, for me, sometimes the most fascinating aspects of history aren’t the people or the great conflicts, but the different ways people choose to do things when starting with a clean slate.

Take revolutionary France. Once the revolutionaries took control of the country, they started what’s now called the “Dechristianisation of France,” one aspect of which was the proposal of an entirely new calendar to replace the current Pope-ordianed Gregorian calendar (which we use in the US). Reading about it, a new system would make sense.

He’s gone to the sharks. Scientists have now seen two, count ‘em, two, virgin births by sharks. These are sharks in captivity, no male sharks around, and tests prove the DNA is from only the mother.

Hey Pope, hey Bishops, you think virgin births are so cool? Gonna worship sharks now? Huh?

Yeah, that’s what I thought,

Lark