Regulators in the US have taken a big step toward bringing antitrust suits against American tech giants, but they face a long road ahead.

Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook are facing unprecedented scrutiny in their own backyard. The US Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Federal Trade Commission are preparing antitrust investigations into the companies, and plan to divvy up the work. As the news emerged, the firm’s share prices were hammered, a clear signal that Wall Street believes the Feds mean business.

Congress also plans to put the companies under the microscope. The Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives said it's launching a wide-ranging investigation of the market power of the tech giants.

The obvious question is: why now? The European Union has been sounding the alarm about Big Tech’s super-sized influence for years – and imposing massive fines on Google in particular for anti-competitive behavior.

The most likely answer is American politics. Some prominent Democrats, including senator and presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, have been calling loudly for tech giants to be broken up to stop them harming consumers’ interests. With a presidential election on the horizon, the Republicans likely want to be seen as tough on Big Tech, too. There’s also a widespread suspicion of Silicon Valley’s liberal tendencies. President Donald Trump has a history of trading barbs with Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s boss, and regularly rails against what he sees as social media and search companies’ anti-conservative bias.

Politics aside, there’s plenty for antitrust watchdogs to sink their teeth into. Amazon is accused of using data from its online platform to gain an unfair advantage over other sellers. The EU has already punishedGoogle's manipulation of search results to favor its businesses. Apple’s fighting a private lawsuit which alleges its 30% take on apps sold in its apps store is an abuse of monopoly power. And Facebook dominates the digital ad market together with Google.

Critics such as Warren have used sporting analogies to justify calls for breaking up the tech giants. “You can get to be the umpire in a baseball game, or you can have a team in the game, but you don’t get to be the umpire and have a team in the game,’ she tweeted earlier this year.

If any of the tech giants are found guilty of anti-competitive behavior, they’re likely to be hit with Hefty fines and other sanctions. That may not be enough to satisfy people like Warren, but trying to force through a breakup of one or more of the companies will be tough to do because:

1.Big tech firms have generally made their services available for free. US antitrust law focuses primarily on whether a monopolist has harmed consumers by driving up prices and restricting investment in a market. While firms like Facebook and Google certainly aren’t paragons when it comes to things like privacy, they’ve provided a cornucopia of free stuff to consumers and invest heavily in R&D. That doesn’t mean they can’t be sanctioned for abusing their market power to, say, manipulate search results in ways that drive up prices. But it would be hard to prove they have harmed consumers broadly in the eyes of the law.

2.They aren’t “natural monopolies” like those found in, say, the utility industry, where the cost to enter a market is so vast other companies are dissuaded from doing so, allowing incumbents to drive up prices. The challenge would-be rivals face is to overcome the “network effects” that underpin the big tech companies’ success. A service like Amazon has a magnetic attraction for buyers because they know they will find plenty of the sellers on its platform. And as more buyers roll up, even more sellers will want to join. This will undoubtedly deter competition, but it’s not illegal.

3.Big tech firms dominate data gathering and use insights to provide even more free services. The vast number of customers using their products mean Big Tech firms benefit from what’s helpful to think of as a data snowball. The more customers they attract, the more data they can harvest from them. That information is then used to tailor new services that attract even more users. This cycle is even more powerful in the era of AI, which relies on crunching vast amounts of data for its efficacy.
​
The Microsoft precedent: None of this may deter US regulators, who can draw on Microsoft’s experience in the 1990s for inspiration. The DoJ tried to split Microsoft up to stop it bundling its Internet Explorer web browser with its dominant Windows operating system. The effort failed, but the bruising court battles harmed the company’s reputation and curbed its anti-competitive instincts. History could be about to repeat itself in the internet era.

On the heels of Google buying analytics startup Looker last week for $2.6 billion, Salesforce today announced a huge piece of news in a bid to step up its own work in data visualization and tools to help enterprises make sense of the sea of data that they use and amass: Salesforce is buying Tableau for $15.7 billion in an all-stock deal.

The latter is publicly traded, and this deal will involve shares of Tableau Class A and Class B common stock getting exchanged for 1.103 shares of Salesforce common stock, the company said, and so the $15.7 billion figure is the enterprise value of the transaction, based on the average price of Salesforce’s shares as of June 7, 2019.

This is a significant jump on Tableau’s last market cap ($10.79 billion two days earlier.)

This is a massive deal for Salesforce as it continues to diversify beyond CRM software and into deeper layers of analytics to offer a 360-degree view of the customer and become a de facto data stack for the enterprise.
The company reportedly worked hard to buy LinkedIn but lost out to Microsoft. While there isn’t a whole lot in common between LinkedIn and Tableau, this deal will also help Salesforce extend its engagement (and data intelligence) for the customers that Salesforce already has — something that LinkedIn would have also helped it to do.

Even with Google’s move to buy Looker, one could argue that analytics is a big enough area that all major tech companies are getting their ducks in a row with stronger data analytics strategies and products. It’s unclear whether the two deals were made in response to each other, although it seems that Salesforce has been eyeing Tableau for years.

 “We are bringing together the world’s #1 CRM with the #1 analytics platform. Tableau helps people see and understand data, and Salesforce helps people engage and understand customers. It’s truly the best of both worlds for our customers – bringing together two critical platforms that every customer needs to understand their world,” said Marc Benioff, chairman, and co-CEO of Salesforce. “I’m thrilled to welcome Adam and his team to Salesforce.”

Tableau has about 86,000 business customers, including Charles Schwab, Verizon, Schneider Electric, Southwest and Netflix. Salesforce said Tableau would operate independently and under its own brand post-acquisition. It will also remain headquartered in Seattle, Wash., headed by CEO Adam Selipsky along with others on the current leadership team.

Indeed, later during an analyst conference call, Benioff let it drop that Seattle would become Salesforce’s official second headquarters with the closing of this deal.

That’s not to say, though, that the two will not be working together.

On the contrary, Salesforce is already talking up the possibilities of expanding what the company is already doing with its Einstein platform (launched back in 2016, Einstein is the home of all of Salesforce’s AI-based initiatives.) 

“Joining forces with Salesforce will enhance our ability to help people everywhere see and understand data,” said Selipsky. “As part of the world’s #1 CRM company, Tableau’s intuitive and powerful analytics will enable millions of more people to discover actionable insights across their entire organizations. I’m delighted that our companies share very similar cultures and a relentless focus on customer success. I look forward to working together in support of our customers and communities.”

“Salesforce’s incredible success has always been based on anticipating the needs of our customers and providing them the solutions they need to grow their businesses,” said Keith Block, co-CEO, Salesforce. “Data is the foundation of every digital transformation, and the addition of Tableau will accelerate our ability to deliver customer success by enabling a truly unified and powerful view across all of a customer’s data.”

Following its release of a pocket-sized handheld camera late last year, DJI – the Shenzhen-based tech company best known for its drones – has recently launched its first action camera, the Osmo Action. While the new camera is a latecomer to the game, it should compete well with similar products, such as the GoPro.

Design and Hardware.The Osmo Action doesn’t stray too far from conventional action camera design – it is small, rectangular-shaped and made of rugged composite material that combines plastic and rubber.
It is waterproof, shockproof and, at 124g, can be easily mounted on top of helmets, skateboards or bicycle handlebars.

There’s a 12-megapixel fisheye lens with a wide 145-degree field of vision. All of this is standard fare for action cameras and is neither better nor worse than GoPro’s Hero 7 Black in any meaningful way.

There is, however, one stand-out feature: in addition to the main screen on the backside of the camera, there is a secondary front-facing display, which has never been offered before on an action camera.

Having a front-facing screen improves shooting selfie videos significantly as it allows the user to see precisely what they’re recording. It makes so much sense in today’s selfie-centric vlogger generation that, in hindsight, it’s baffling why GoPro has never thought of this before.

The camera has three hardware buttons – power, shutter, and mode switch – and a responsive main screen that supports swiping and tapping. The bright, 2.3-inch main screen is large enough to let the user easily tweak shooting modes and settings.

The camera runs on a relatively small 1,300mAh battery, which offers about 90 minutes of recording time, but it is removable, and thus, interchangeable. The footage is stored on a micro-SD card, which is not included with the camera.

Software.The Osmo Action can connect to DJI’s Mimo app, available on both iOS and Android, and once linked; the camera can be controlled remotely with a mobile device. However, the device’s touch screen interface is so intuitive that most reviewers found little need to sync up the app.

The camera can capture videos at a wide range of resolutions, from 720p up to 4K/60fps. Shooting in lower resolution, such as 1080p, allows the camera to bump the framerate up to 240fps, ideal for capturing fast-moving moments.

Performance.Electronic image stabilization (EIS) is crucial for action cameras as they’re meant to shoot on the move, so it’s just as well DJI has years of experience writing EIS algorithms for its high-flying drone cameras.

The camera’s EIS mode is called “Rock Steady,” and it can be activated with a couple of taps. The reason DJI gives the option to toggle EIS on or off is that there are trade-offs.

Footage with “Rock Steady” on have a slightly smaller field of vision (digital cropping is essential for EIS) and dynamic range suffers due to lack of HDR (high dynamic range). You should turn the mode off to get the best video quality and colors if you’re shooting with the device in a stationary position, but anytime you’re moving, turn it on as the difference in fluidity and stability is drastic.

Conclusion.
At $380, the Osmo Action initially seemed expensive for someone who might not participate in extreme sports and who has tested fully capable smartphones for around that same price range.
​
Extreme sport participants who like to document their adventures used to have their options dominated by GoPros. At $349, DJI’s Osmo Action is offering a cheaper alternative to the GoPro’s Hero 7 Black at $420, and you get the front-facing second screen. Not surprisingly, GoPro has now reduced the price of the Hero 7 to $349! The Osmo Action may have just taken GoPro’s throne.

Cars will soon be able to recognize you by your eyes, skin, gait and even your heartbeat, enabling a host of personalized experiences but raising troubling privacy questions, as well.

Why it Matters. New biometric technologies being developed by automakers will authenticate your identity and help keep you safe by also monitoring your health and wellbeing. But unless carefully guarded, that personal data can also be easily exploited by cybercriminals.

What's Happening. Automakers and their suppliers are working on a variety of driver-identification technologies such as facial and iris scans, as well as voice and fingerprint tracking.

• They would enable a driver to start the engine without a key and the car would automatically adjust the seats, mirrors, climate and audio settings.
• The car could then also communicate with home automation systems, turning on lights or opening the garage, for example, and automatically pay for tolls, parking or gas.
• For autonomous vehicles and car-sharing apps, ID verification is important to ensure passengers get into the right vehicle and are who they say they are.

What's Next. Such ID features are coming in the next year or so, followed by a second wave of more advanced biometric technologies. Goode Intelligence says the market for automotive-related biometric content may reach nearly $1 billion by 2023.

• An alcohol detection system that could be available as early as next year would know whether a motorist is drunk by gathering a whiff of their ambient breath. The system is being developed by a public-private partnership.

• B-Secur is marketing its Heartkey technology that can identify a driver by the unique rhythm of their heartbeat, and measure their level of stress or fatigue or even detect early signs of a stroke or heart attack, CEO Alan Foreman tells Axios.

• Aerendir Mobile's sensors capture micro-vibrations – tiny muscle twitches from cells in the human nervous system – to identify individuals and monitor their well-being by creating a neurological signature that's akin to a million-character-long password, founder Martin Zizi tells Axios.

Yes, But. Just as facial recognition systems are sounding alarms about privacy and human rights, biometric technologies in vehicles raise privacy concerns, experts say.

• Biometric information can be particularly revealing and immutable, Lauren Smith, senior counsel for the Future of Privacy Forum, says. Unlike a password or account number, you can't change your biological makeup.
• Without federal laws on bioprivacy, carmakers need to abide by state data-protection laws, many of which require notice before biometric data is collected, and the ability to opt out.

• Carmakers that signed the Automotive Privacy Principles created a higher, opt-in threshold for biometric information, requiring consent before data can be used for marketing or shared with others.

If you’re lucky enough to get to travel abroad, you know it’s getting easier and easier to use our phones and other gadgets to translate for us. So why not do so in a way that makes sense to you? This little gadget seeking funds on Kickstarter looks right up my alley, offering quick transcription and recording – plus music playback, like an iPod Shuffle with superpowers.

The ONE Miniis not that complex of a device – a couple of microphones and a wireless board in tasteful packaging – but that combination allows for a lot of useful stuff to happen both offline and with its companion app.

You activate the device, and it starts recording and both translating and transcribing the audio via a cloud service as it goes (or later, if you choose). That right there is already super useful when you have meetings to transcribe, or you’re meeting one-on-one with someone who doesn’t speak English.

Recordings are kept on the phone because there is no memory onboard the device. There’s an option for a cloud service, but that probably won’t be necessary, considering the compact size of these audio files. If you’re paranoid about security, this probably isn’t your solution, but for everyday stuff, it should be just fine.

If you want to translate a conversation with someone whose language you don’t speak, you pick two of the 12 built-in languages in the app and then either pass the gadget back and forth or let it sit between you while you talk. The transcript will show on the phone, and the ONE Mini can speak the translation in its little robotic voice.

Right now, translation is only available online, but the company plans to offer offline translation for specific language pairs that have reliable two-way edge models, probably Mandarin-English and Korean-Japanese.
It has a headphone jack, too, which lets it act as a wireless playback device for the recordings or your music, or to take calls using the nice onboard mics. It’s lightweight and has a little clip, so it’s probably better than connecting directly to your phone in many cases.
​
There’s also a 24/7 interpreter line that charges two bucks a minute. Though most people won’t use the service, in an emergency, it could be pretty helpful to have a panic button that sends you directly to a person who speaks both the languages you’ve selected.
Right now you can buy a ONE Mini for $79. They’ve already passed their funding goal and are planning on shipping in June, so it shouldn’t be a long wait.

Flying cars do sound cool, but whether they’re a good idea is up for debate. Fortunately, they do seem to have some benefits, among them, improved efficiency – at least on long trips.

Air travel takes an enormous amount of energy since you have to lift something heavy into the air and keep it there for a good while. This is often faster but rarely more efficient than ground transportation, which lets gravity do the hard work.

Of course, once an aircraft gets up to altitude, it cruises at high speed with little friction to contend with, and whether you’re going 100 feet or 50 miles, you only have to take off once. So, University of Michigan researchers thought there might be a sweet spot where taking a flying car might actually save energy. It turns out there is – kind of. The team published their resultsrecently in Nature Communications.

The U of M engineers made an efficiency model for both ground transport and electric vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft, based on specs from aerospace companies working on them.

“Our model represents general trends in the VTOL space and uses parameters from multiple studies and aircraft designs to specify weight, lift-to-drag ratio, and battery-specific energy,” said study co-author Noah Furbush in a U-M news release.

They looked at how these various theoretical vehicles performed when taking multiple numbers of people different distances, comparing energy consumed.

As you might imagine, flying isn’t efficient for going a mile or two, since you use up all that energy getting to altitude and then have to come right back down. But at the 100-kilometer mark (about 62 miles) things look a little different.

For a 100 km trip, a single passenger in a flying car uses 35% less energy than a gas-powered vehicle, but still 28% more than an electric vehicle. The flying car is better than the gas one starting at around 40 km. But it never really catches up with the EVs for efficiency, though it gets close. 

To make it better, they had to adjust the numbers a bit, assuming that flying taxis would be more likely to operate at full capacity, with a pilot and three passengers, while ground vehicles were unlikely to have their average occupancy of 1.5 people change much. With that in mind, they found that a 100 km trip with three passengers barely beats the per-person efficiency of EVs.

That may seem like a bit of a thin victory, but keep in mind that the flying car would be making the trip in a quarter of the time, unaffected by traffic and other issues. Plus there’s the view.
​
It’s all theoretical right now, naturally, but studies like this one help companies looking to get into this business decide how their service will be organized and marketed. I think we’ll see these alternative forms of travel and sooner than many planners thought.

Nobody likes to pay sales tax and until recently, most of us shopped online to avoid our local sales tax.
Nearly one year ago, the Supreme Court ruled that out-of-state retailers must collect sales tax on internet sales. 

One retailer many of us use for those “have to have” gadgets is B&H Photo Videoin New York City. This past week they announced a new credit card called Payboo. This is a traditional credit card that has one extra feature: when you buy anything from B&H and use the Payboo card, they will instantly refund you the sales tax before you finish the purchase. And at B&H, instant means instant – no expiring points, credits, or coupons to worry about. This new Payboo card provides an additional discount equal to your sales tax rate, and B&H will still collect and remit state sales tax in accordance with state sales tax laws and regulations.

​While none of us needs another credit card, this may be worth it.

Travelers might finally be getting a break from the ever-frustrating airport security rules. Thanks to the introduction of new carry-on baggage scanners called CT (Computed Tomography), travelers won’t have to take electronics or liquids out of their bags. The TSA announced the rollout of this new technology, which would ultimately cut down on long security lines and make the airport experience much smoother.

The new machines can create 3D images of a bag’s contents and automatically detect and scan items you are currently required to remove. This includes electronic devices like laptops and even liquids. According to Bloomberg Government, 300 of these new machines have been ordered by the TSA so far, and they will begin to appear in airports this summer. Eventually, the goal is to replace all current X-ray machines with these new CT scanners. The TSA has been testing these machines since 2017, and once airport employees become comfortable operating the new equipment, shorter security lines are expected.
​               
The list of airports that will receive the new CT machines has not yet been released, though they are currently being used at the following airports:

• Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL)
• Baltimore-Washington International Airport (BWI)
• Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD)
• Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG)
• Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW)
• Houston Hobby Airport (HOU)
• Indianapolis International Airport (IND)
• John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
• Logan International Airport (BOS)
• Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
• Oakland International Airport (OAK)
• Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX)
• St. Louis Lambert International Airport (STL)
• Washington-Dulles International Airport (IAD)

 

When you’re on the road, Starbuck’s ‘third space’ idea can become compelling. You might want to get out of your hotel room for a change of atmosphere, or you might need a better cup of coffee. And you probably still need to get online with something other than your phone, and coffee shops mean Wi-Fi as much as caffeine.

If you pick the big chains, the Wi-Fi is pretty reliable. If you choose a smaller shop, the coffee is often far tastier, but the wireless can be hit and miss. A journalist writing about this problem, went into a little coffee place in Seattle to get out of the rain and catch up on some work over a weekend, his phone warned him that it could connect to the Wi-Fi but not to the internet.

He had the same problem when he connected his laptop to the coffee shop Wi-Fi. It’s not always possible to diagnose what’s wrong with a Wi-Fi connection; often the bandwidth is overloaded by the number of people connected to free Wi-Fi, or the router isn’t correctly configured to hand out IP addresses to devices. That means waiting for a few people to leave or asking the staff to restart the router.

But frequently, the problem with networks is DNS; the wi-fi router is probably using the DNS server of the ISP to which it’s connected. Switch to a public DNS service like Cloudflare’s 1.1.1.1, and you should get connected – and probably find websites a bit more responsive, too.

In Windows 10, click the network indicator in the taskbar to open the network menu and choose Change adapter options to open the Network Connections control panel with the list of network hardware you can use. Right-click on the wi-fi connection and select Properties. Click on Internet Protocol Version 4 (TCP/IPv4) and choose Properties again, then click to fill in your DNS details. Fill in 1.1.1.1 to use the Cloudflare service; you can use 1.1.1.0 for the alternative DNS server if you want Cloudflare as the fallback, or 8.8.8.8 to use Google’s DNS service.

You can do the same thing on a Mac. Choose System Preferences / Network and select your wi-fi connection, then click Advanced and choose the DNS tab. Again, fill in 1.1.1.1 to use the Cloudflare service; you can use 1.1.1.0 for the alternative DNS server if you want Cloudflare as the fallback, or 8.8.8.8 to use Google’s DNS service. 
​
On an iPad, look under Settings / Wi-Fi and tap next to the Wi-Fi network name. Scroll down and select the Configure DNS option, then tap Manual and fill in the addresses. Then you can get back to your coffee and  on with some work.

Amazon has plans to establish a constellation of 3,236 satellites in low Earth orbit to patch up areas with poor or no internet connectivity.

Amazon's planned push into satellite-delivered broadband is taking shape under Project Kuiper, details of which appear in three documents filed with the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) last month. Kuiper Systems LLC filed the reports.  

The documents reveal Amazon plans to put 3,236 satellites at three different altitudes. There would be 784 satellites orbiting at an altitude of 367 miles; 1,296 satellites at 379 miles; and 1,156 satellites at 391miles.  
An Amazon spokesperson confirmed the existence of Amazon's satellite broadband ambitions, noting that it was a "long-term project that envisions serving tens of millions of people who lack basic access to broadband internet.”

The company is also planning to partner with other companies to bring the project to reality.  

That could make companies in the space-broadband race, like SpaceX and OneWeb, potential rivals or partners. The FCC in November authorized SpaceX to deploy and operate 7,000 satellites in very low Earth orbit to deliver broadband. 

OneWeb, which has $2 billion in backing from the likes of Airbus, Coca Cola, Softbank, and Virgin, in February, launched six satellites with the same ambition. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin space venture already has a contract to launch satellites for OneWeb and TeleSat. 

Meanwhile, Facebook, Boeing, and LeoSat have revealed plans to beam the internet from space. Alongside SpaceX's FCC authorization, the regulator also authorized spectrum in the US for both TeleSat's and LeoSat's space broadband systems.   

Should Amazon's plans come to fruition, its satellites would provide about 95% of the world's population with coverage between latitudes 56ºN to 56ºS. The two parallels circle the Earth at about the latitude of Sweden and below Australia.  

Amazon will still need to get approval from the FCC and other regulators around the world to move forward with Project Kuiper. 

Satellite internet today is typically costly. However, there is hope that satellites in low Earth orbit will be cheaper and offer lower latency.
​
Amazon said it would "of course look at all options" when asked whether Bezos' Blue Origin would have the edge over others for launching the Kuiper constellation.