If you are planning any trips that are off the grid and yet still want access to phone and internet, then you need to become familiar with the Iridium satellite constellation. With satellites orbiting approximately 485 miles above the earth, this network offers global phone and data coverage, no cell towers or Wi-Fi hotspots required.

There are several kits that allow you access to the Iridium system, and one of the best is the Iridium GO! Package. The basic package comes with the Iridium GO! base station, carry case, and AC travel charger with international adapter and is suitable for those who have access to electricity. 

It's priced at $699 but remember that there are additional activation fees and a Iridium network subscription plan required (and this can be quite expensive).

The Iridium GO! Offers 15.5 hours of standby battery life, and up to 5.5 hours of talk time.

For those who genuinely want to go off-grid, there's also a special package that includes not only the Iridium GO! base station and AC travel charger with international adapter, but also comes with a solar charger, two batteries additional, and a desktop charger. This is priced at a heftier $1,095.

There are also marine and aviation equipment packages available.

Iridium GO! supports a full range of global communications using optimized apps:
                    •   Voice calls
                   •   Text messaging
                   •   Email access
                   •   Weather updates
                   •   Customized third-party apps
                   •   Emergency alerts (SOS)
                   •   Photo sharing
                   •   GPS tracking
                   •   Posting to Facebook/Twitter
​
If you need to be in communication when off the grid, this is the perfect kit. Yes, it's expensive, and the subscriptions add a great deal more to the cost, but you are accessing a satellite network, not a router in the back of a café!

One of the highlights of MIT’s Emtech Next Conference in June was a debate on whether we should tax robots. We heavily tax human workers, so why not the machines that replace them? Then, goes the theory, that tax money could help provide training or benefits for workers who’ve lost their jobs to automation.

Ryan Abbott, a law professor at Surrey University, presented a convincing case for such a tax– or, more precisely, for removing the tax incentives that favor automation over human labor. Many business decisions to automate processes, argued Abbott, are driven by these tax advantages, not because the robots are more productive. If automation is more efficient, suggested Abbott, let that be the reason businesses decide to use it – not some tax break.

The counter-arguments from Ryan Avent, economics columnist at the Economist, were that taxes (or ending tax breaks) would slow innovation, and, in any case, there is little economic evidence that robots are taking over jobs. While these points appear to be less convincing, a robot tax alone won’t solve the lack of good jobs. But removing the financial incentives that favor automation over humans will at least create a level playing field.

Even more erroneous is the argument that a robot tax is a slippery slope: are they going to tax my Roomba or smart toaster next? Somehow, we manage to tax labor, and yet you can still mow your lawn and clean your house without paying the government.

Alas, the Emtech Next attendees disagreed, with 70% voting against the robot tax after hearing the debate.
One of the recurring themes at the conference was that businesses could better exploit automation and AI not just for their own efficiency, but to improve productivity and grow the economy as a whole. How? A pair of engineers, Meera Sampath at the State University of New York and Pramod P. Khargonekar at the University of California, Irvine, presented their plan for “socially responsible automation,” which starts with getting technologists to think harder about how their creations will actually be used and how those uses can benefit workers and society.

A shout-out to workers: Too often in these discussions of how automation and AI are affecting jobs, the voices of workers themselves are absent. MIT’s Thomas Kochan, speaking at the conference, at least provided a reminder to listen to such views, even in the early stages of product designs, and to involve them more in automation decisions. And, he argued, companies need to take the time to give their existing workforce the skills and training necessary to integrate them with changes in automation better.

Let’s admit it, every time we hear the word “co-bot” we cringe. Yes, there have been remarkable advances in robotics over the last decade that allow these machines to more safely and comfortably work alongside people and do more human-like tasks. And, yes, we know the promise is that, by taking over mundane tasks, these robots will free people up to do more interesting and, hopefully, productive ones.

But that’s a business decision that too often companies are not taking; instead, many are simply replacing their workers. If robots do 20% of the tasks that a worker was doing, then you need 20% fewer people to get the job done.

It’s become increasingly clear to economists that this one reason we’re facing a crisis: wages are flat, and job opportunities are limited for many workers.

MIT economist Daron Acemoglu blames this on what he calls “so-so” automation and technologies. Advances like automation should be a boon to productivity, but productivity growth has been sluggish for more than a decade. That, says Acemoglu, is because too often companies are automating jobs even when the machines are not more productive, because of the tax mentioned above distortions and a general enthusiasm for robots. So, you have a double whammy; not only are robots replacing workers, they’re not particularly adept at growing the economy.

The way out is to create new, productive tasks for the workers replaced by the automation. (That’s what happened in the past). And that’s where AI could be useful. Examples are not that hard to imagine. For instance, if you free up healthcare workers, such as radiologists and nurses, from routine tasks, they could use AI systems to collect and analyze far more patient data, expanding their capabilities and giving them new ways to advise and treat patients. Acemoglu cites similar examples existing in education and manufacturing.
​
But, and this is key, Acemoglu warns that this won’t necessarily happen on its own. You can’t leave this up to the markets or the technologists. We need to pursue this goal deliberately.

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)

 

Two hikers missing for five days on California’s Mount Baldy have been found alive after rescuers tracked their footprints to their camp, according to authorities.

Eric Desplinter and Gabrielle Wallace had gone hiking in the San Gabriel Mountains in San Bernardino County, California, on Saturday, April 6th and were expected to return that night. But when the two hadn't returned by 8 p.m., friends reported the two missing.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff said late Wednesday the two had been rescued after days of desperate searching over a 30 square mile area.

Authorities said rescuers found two sets of footprints in Cucamonga Canyon Wednesday at which point they alerted a search-and-rescue helicopter to fly over the area. The rescue team spotted Desplinter, 33, and Wallace, 31, at a campfire and lifted them to safety late Wednesday.

The pair lost the trail and when they tried to descend through a valley, it "was more treacherous than we thought," Desplinter said.

Desplinter was an experienced hiker, but authorities previously said the two had limited supplies of food and water.

The campers rationed what little food they had and drank water through a LifeStraw. This technology can filter dirty water. The ability to stay hydrated was one of the mitigating factors rescuers said helped to make the recovery a success.

LifeStraw products use a hollow fiber membrane. These membranes have microscopic pores that trap contaminants. Bacteria and parasites are bigger than the pores in the filter. Water can pass through, but contaminants larger than 0.2 microns remain trapped. Some LifeStraw products use a two-stage filtration process. In addition to the hollow fiber membrane, a carbon capsule absorbs chemicals like chlorine, pesticides, and even heavy metals like lead.
​
"Eric and Gabrielle will be flown to the Mt. Baldy Fire Station where they will be reunited with their families and loved ones," the sheriff's office said in a statement.

Volvo announced that it would use cameras installed inside its vehicles to monitor driver behavior and intervene if the driver appears to be drunk or distracted. It’s a risky move by an automaker, even one with a reputation for safety like Volvo, which could raise concerns among privacy advocates. 

Volvo’s in-car cameras will monitor eye movements to gauge driver distraction or intoxication. If a driver looks away for some time, such as at a smartphone, or fails to keep their hands on the steering wheel, a representative from Volvo’s on-call assistance centers will call them to check in. Drivers who aren’t watching the road, or even have their eyes closed, will be warned as well. If they don’t respond, the car will slow and also stop. The system will roll-out to all Volvo cars by early 2020. 

This follows Volvo’s recent announcement that it will be limiting the top speed on all of its vehicles to 180 km/h (112 mph) in a bid to reduce traffic fatalities. Volvo is framing these new policies as crucial components in its Vision 2020goal, in which no one is killed or seriously injured in a Volvo vehicle by 2020. Over the years, the company built its reputation on safety and quirky designs, and today’s announcement is meant to underline that.

“When it comes to safety, our aim is to avoid accidents altogether rather than limit the impact when an accident is imminent and unavoidable,” Henrik Green, senior vice president for research and development at Volvo Car Group, said in a statement. “In this case, cameras will monitor for behavior that may lead to serious injury or death.”

The use of in-car cameras to monitor drivers is not entirely unprecedented. Cadillac uses infrared cameras facing the driver to power its advanced driver assist system, Super Cruise. The camera tracks the driver’s eye movements, allowing for a “hands-free” driving experience. If the driver’s attention wanders, Super Cruise uses an escalating series of audible and vibrating alerts to ensure the driver keeps their eyes on the road.

As camera use increases in the name of safety, there’s a real chance they can be misused to invade privacy. At an event in Sweden, the company preemptively dismissed this criticism by likening it to early objection to seatbelt laws. 

A spokesperson for Volvo did not immediately respond to questions about the storage of video footage or whether law enforcement could have access to it. Automakers are already collecting lots of information from your car today, but mostly for vehicle analytics. 
​
GM has said that the camera in its Cadillac cars isn’t recording anything; it’s just a buffered video feed to make sure Super Cruise works as it should.