Big Data, Cloud, Smart Mobile And Even AR Morph Into One Mind Boggling Thing

IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Actually One Big Thing

by David Mayes

This IEEE Talk discusses the three biggest trends in online technology and proposes that in fact, they represent one huge integrated trend that is already having a major impact on the way we live, work and think. The 2012 Obama Campaign’s Dashboard mobile application, integrating Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile is perhaps the most significant example of this trend, combining all three technologies into one big thing. A major shakeout and industry consolidation seems inevitable. Additional developments as diverse as augmented reality, the Internet of Things, Smart Grid, near field communication, mobile payment processing, and location-based services are also considered as linked to this overall trend.

IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? from David Mayes

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? Presentation Transcript

• 1. Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Integrated Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 1
• 2. IEEE: UBC Okanagan Wednesday, February 6th, 2013 ©David Mayes 2
• 3. Speaker Introduction IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 3
• 4. David Mayes: LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mayo615 Personal Blog: http://mayo615.com UBC Office: EME 4151 (250) 807-9821 / Hours by appt. Email: david.mayes@ubc.ca mayo0615@gmail.com Mobile: (250) 864-9552 Twitter: @mayo615 Experience: Executive management, access to venture capital, International business development, sales & marketing, entrepreneurial mentorship, technology assessment, strategic planning, renewable energy technology. Intel Corporation (US/Europe/Japan), 01 Computers Group (UK) Ltd, Mobile Data International (Canada/Intl.), Silicon Graphics (US), Sun Microsystems (US), Ascend Communications (US/Intl.), P-Cube (US/Israel/Intl.), Global Internet Group LLP (US/Intl.), New Zealand Trade & Enterprise. IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 4
• 5. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 5
• 6. Some Historical Context IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 6
• 7. Canada’s McLuhan: The First Hint “The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image of a global village.” Marshall McLuhan, “Gutenberg Galaxy”, 1962, Canadian author, educator, & philosopher (1911 – 1980) IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? Video: The “McLuhan” Scene from Annie Hall © David Mayes 7
• 8. Stuart Brand, Jobs & Woz: The Whole Earth Catalog IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 8
• 9. Grove, Noyce and Moore IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? “We had no idea at all that we had turned the first stone on something that was going to be an $80 billion business.” -Gordon Moore ©David Mayes 9
• 10. Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Vin Cerf IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 10
• 11. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 12. The Emergence of SoMoClo IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? Social + Mobile + Cloud ©David Mayes 12
• 13. Emergence of Social Media IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 13
• 14. 2012 Social Media Market Landscape IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 14
• 15. Emergence of “Cloud Computing” IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 15
• 16. Emergence of End-user Cloud Apps IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 16
• 17. 2012 Cloud Enterprise Players IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 17
• 18. The Key Issue: Data Privacy Reliability, and Security Despite reassurances, there is no permanent solution, no silver bullet. The only solution is to unplug IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 18
• 19. Recent Cyber Security News: • Google Chairman, Eric Schmidt’s new book on China: • “the world’s most active and enthusiastic filterer of information” as well as “the most sophisticated and prolific” hacker of foreign companies. In a world that is becoming increasingly digital, the willingness of China’s government and state companies to use cyber crime gives the country an economic and political edge. • NY Times, WSJ hacking last week traced to China • Twitter theft of 250K users personal information last week • Sony PlayStation Anonymous hacks (twice in 2 weeks) IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 19
• 20. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 21. The Emergence of “Big Data” IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 21
• 22. Emergence of “Big Data” • Major advances in scale and sophistication of government intelligence gathering and analysis • Cost no object • NSA PRISM global telecom surveillance programPost 9/11 World IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 22
• 23. An Interesting Scientific Analogy Chaos, with reference to chaos theory, refers to an apparent lack of order in a system that nevertheless obeys particular laws or rules; this understanding of chaos is synonymous with dynamical instability, a condition discovered by the physicist Henri Poincare in the early 20th century that refers to an inherent lack of predictability in some physical systems. IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 23
• 24. Key Drivers of the Emergence of Big Data • Moore’s Law – compute cost and power • Design rules, multi-core, 3D design • Massive cost decline in data storage • Emergence of solid state memristor • Google Spanner 1st global real-time database • DARPA “Python” programming language • Data Center data storage accumulation • 2.7 zettabytes currently and growing rapidly • A zettabyte equals 1021 bytes (1000 exabytes) IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 24
• 25. The Big Data Landscape Today IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 25
• 26. The Key Issue: Privacy “Get over it! You have no privacy!” Scott McNealy, former CEO of Sun Microsystems IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 26
• 27. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 28. The Emergence of Smart Mobile IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 28
• 29. Emergence of Smart Mobile IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 29
• 30. Key Drivers of Smart Mobile • Moore’s Law – compute cost and power • Design rules, multi-core, 3D design • Focus on reducing heat: gate leakage • Intel Atom “all day battery life” is a beginning • Massive cost decline in data storage • Mobile bandwidth:4G/LTE “no cost difference” • “White space” metro Wi-Fi potential maybe • New available spectrum between digital TV channels: increased transmit power • PC market death: Dell Computer & HP IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 30
• 31. Mobile-based Services • GPS, Cloud, personal and database info on mobile • Geotagging from current location tied to your objective: • Find merchandise, restaurant, bar, etc. • Find and tag people • Find people with similar interests nearby • The rise of the mobile gaming market • Already well-established in Hong Kong, Seoul • North America far behind Asian telecom markets • Facebook has just announced LBS plans • The downside: battery drain issue still critical • “People want their phones to do too much” • 4G LTE, Wifi, Bluetooth, GPS, Streaming, Mobile Gaming IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 31
• 32. Location-based Services Landscape IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 32
• 33. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 34. The Convergence of “ToDaClo” Touch + Data + Cloud IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 34
• 35. David Mayes ‹#›
• 36. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 37. Discussion: Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile, Big Deal or Not? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 37
• 38. My Key Takeaway Points • Even from the 50,000 foot level, a shakeout and consolidation seem inevitable • A lot of people are going to lose a lot of money • There will be “snake oil” sold that does not work • Nevertheless these three new markets are actually one unified market, and likely: The Next Big Thing IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 38
• 39. What Do You Think? • No. ToDaClo is mostly media hype, and not a “Big Deal.” • I’m skeptical. ToDaClo will probably be a “Big Deal,” but I haven’t seen much yet • Maybe. I do not know yet whether ToDaClo will be a Big Deal • Yes. ToDaClo is a Big Deal and it is already changing our lives IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 39
• 40. Thank You! IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 40
• 41. ©David Mayes 41

 

Google’s Quantum Dream May Be Just Around The Corner

In 1981, Richard Feynman, probably the most famous physicist of his time asked the question: “Can we simulate physics on a computer?” At the time the answer was “theoretically yes,” but practically not at that time. Today, we may be on the verge of answering “yes” in practice to Feynman’s original question. Quantum computers operate in such a strange way and are so radically different from today’s computers that it requires some understanding of quantum mechanics and bizarre properties like “quantum entanglement.” Quantum computers are in a realm orders of magnitude beyond today’s supercomputers. Their application in specific computational problems like cryptography, Big Data analysis, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), and sub-atomic physics will change our World. Canadian quantum computing company, D-Wave Systems has been at the center of Google’s efforts to pioneer this technology.

Reblogged from New Scientist

 

31 August 2016

Revealed: Google’s plan for quantum computer supremacy

The field of quantum computing is undergoing a rapid shake-up, and engineers at Google have quietly set out a plan to dominate

By Jacob Aron

SOMEWHERE in California, Google is building a device that will usher in a new era for computing. It’s a quantum computer, the largest ever made, designed to prove once and for all that machines exploiting exotic physics can outperform the world’s top supercomputers.

And New Scientist has learned it could be ready sooner than anyone expected – perhaps even by the end of next year.

The quantum computing revolution has been a long time coming. In the 1980s, theorists realised that a computer based on quantum mechanics had the potential to vastly outperform ordinary, or classical, computers at certain tasks. But building one was another matter. Only recently has a quantum computer that can beat a classical one gone from a lab curiosity to something that could actually happen. Google wants to create the first.

The firm’s plans are secretive, and Google declined to comment for this article. But researchers contacted by New Scientist all believe it is on the cusp of a breakthrough, following presentations at conferences and private meetings.

“They are definitely the world leaders now, there is no doubt about it,” says Simon Devitt at the RIKEN Center for Emergent Matter Science in Japan. “It’s Google’s to lose. If Google’s not the group that does it, then something has gone wrong.”

We have had a glimpse of Google’s intentions. Last month, its engineers quietly published a paper detailing their plans (arxiv.org/abs/1608.00263). Their goal, audaciously named quantum supremacy, is to build the first quantum computer capable of performing a task no classical computer can.

“It’s a blueprint for what they’re planning to do in the next couple of years,” says Scott Aaronson at the University of Texas at Austin, who has discussed the plans with the team.

So how will they do it? Quantum computers process data as quantum bits, or qubits. Unlike classical bits, these can store a mixture of both 0 and 1 at the same time, thanks to the principle of quantum superposition. It’s this potential that gives quantum computers the edge at certain problems, like factoring large numbers. But ordinary computers are also pretty good at such tasks. Showing quantum computers are better would require thousands of qubits, which is far beyond our current technical ability.

Instead, Google wants to claim the prize with just 50 qubits. That’s still an ambitious goal – publicly, they have only announced a 9-qubit computer – but one within reach.

“It’s Google’s to lose. If Google’s not the group that does it, then something has gone wrong“

To help it succeed, Google has brought the fight to quantum’s home turf. It is focusing on a problem that is fiendishly difficult for ordinary computers but that a quantum computer will do naturally: simulating the behaviour of a random arrangement of quantum circuits.

Any small variation in the input into those quantum circuits can produce a massively different output, so it’s difficult for the classical computer to cheat with approximations to simplify the problem. “They’re doing a quantum version of chaos,” says Devitt. “The output is essentially random, so you have to compute everything.”

To push classical computing to the limit, Google turned to Edison, one of the most advanced supercomputers in the world, housed at the US National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center. Google had it simulate the behaviour of quantum circuits on increasingly larger grids of qubits, up to a 6 × 7 grid of 42 qubits.

This computation is difficult because as the grid size increases, the amount of memory needed to store everything balloons rapidly. A 6 × 4 grid needed just 268 megabytes, less than found in your average smartphone. The 6 × 7 grid demanded 70 terabytes, roughly 10,000 times that of a high-end PC.

Google stopped there because going to the next size up is currently impossible: a 48-qubit grid would require 2.252 petabytes of memory, almost double that of the top supercomputer in the world. If Google can solve the problem with a 50-qubit quantum computer, it will have beaten every other computer in existence.

Eyes on the prize

By setting out this clear test, Google hopes to avoid the problems that have plagued previous claims of quantum computers outperforming ordinary ones – including some made by Google.

Last year, the firm announced it had solved certain problems 100 million times faster than a classical computer by using a D-Wave quantum computer, a commercially available device with a controversial history. Experts immediately dismissed the results, saying they weren’t a fair comparison.

Google purchased its D-Wave computer in 2013 to figure out whether it could be used to improve search results and artificial intelligence. The following year, the firm hired John Martinis at the University of California, Santa Barbara, to design its own superconducting qubits. “His qubits are way higher quality,” says Aaronson.

It’s Martinis and colleagues who are now attempting to achieve quantum supremacy with 50 qubits, and many believe they will get there soon. “I think this is achievable within two or three years,” says Matthias Troyer at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. “They’ve showed concrete steps on how they will do it.”

Martinis and colleagues have discussed a number of timelines for reaching this milestone, says Devitt. The earliest is by the end of this year, but that is unlikely. “I’m going to be optimistic and say maybe at the end of next year,” he says. “If they get it done even within the next five years, that will be a tremendous leap forward.”

The first successful quantum supremacy experiment won’t give us computers capable of solving any problem imaginable – based on current theory, those will need to be much larger machines. But having a working, small computer could drive innovation, or augment existing computers, making it the start of a new era.

Aaronson compares it to the first self-sustaining nuclear reaction, achieved by the Manhattan project in Chicago in 1942. “It might be a thing that causes people to say, if we want a full-scalable quantum computer, let’s talk numbers: how many billions of dollars?” he says.

Solving the challenges of building a 50-qubit device will prepare Google to construct something bigger. “It’s absolutely progress to building a fully scalable machine,” says Ian Walmsley at the University of Oxford.

For quantum computers to be truly useful in the long run, we will also need robust quantum error correction, a technique to mitigate the fragility of quantum states. Martinis and others are already working on this, but it will take longer than achieving quantum supremacy.

Still, achieving supremacy won’t be dismissed.

“Once a system hits quantum supremacy and is showing clear scale-up behaviour, it will be a flare in the sky to the private sector,” says Devitt. “It’s ready to move out of the labs.”

“The field is moving much faster than expected,” says Troyer. “It’s time to move quantum computing from science to engineering and really build devices.”

D-Wave Quantum Machine Tested by NASA and Google Shows Promise

Researchers from Google’s AI Lab say a controversial quantum machine that it and NASA have been testing since 2013 resoundingly beat a conventional computer in a series of tests.

Source: Controversial Quantum Machine Tested by NASA and Google Shows Promise | MIT Technology Review

Google Says It Has Proved Its Controversial Quantum Computer Really Works

Researchers from Google’s AI Lab say a controversial quantum machine that it and NASA have been testing since 2013 resoundingly beat a conventional computer in a series of tests.

• By Tom Simonite on December 8, 2015

Inside this box is a superconducting chip, cooled to within a fraction of a degree of absolute zero, that might put new power behind artificial-intelligence software.

Google says it has proof that a controversial machine it bought in 2013 really can use quantum physics to work through a type of math that’s crucial to artificial intelligence much faster than a conventional computer.

Governments and leading computing companies such as Microsoft, IBM, and Google are trying to develop what are called quantum computers because using the weirdness of quantum mechanics to represent data should unlock immense data-crunching powers. Computing giants believe quantum computers could make their artificial-intelligence software much more powerful and unlock scientific leaps in areas like materials science. NASA hopes quantum computers could help schedule rocket launches and simulate future missions and spacecraft. “It is a truly disruptive technology that could change how we do everything,” said Rupak Biswas, director of exploration technology at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California.

Biswas spoke at a media briefing at the research center about the agency’s work with Google on a machine the search giant bought in 2013 from Canadian startup D-Wave systems, which is marketed as “the world’s first commercial quantum computer.” The computer is installed at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California, and operates on data using a superconducting chip called a quantum annealer. A quantum annealer is hard-coded with an algorithm suited to what are called “optimization problems,” which are common in machine-learning and artificial-intelligence software.

However, D-Wave’s chips are controversial among quantum physicists. Researchers inside and outside the company have been unable to conclusively prove that the devices can tap into quantum physics to beat out conventional computers.

Hartmut Neven, leader of Google’s Quantum AI Lab in Los Angeles, said today that his researchers have delivered some firm proof of that. They set up a series of races between the D-Wave computer installed at NASA against a conventional computer with a single processor. “For a specific, carefully crafted proof-of-concept problem we achieve a 100-million-fold speed-up,” said Neven.

Google posted a research paper describing its results online last night, but it has not been formally peer-reviewed. Neven said that journal publications would be forthcoming.

Google’s results are striking—but even if verified, they would only represent partial vindication for D-Wave. The computer that lost in the contest with the quantum machine was running code that had it solve the problem at hand using an algorithm similar to the one baked into the D-Wave chip. An alternative algorithm is known that could have let the conventional computer be more competitive, or even win, by exploiting what Neven called a “bug” in D-Wave’s design. Neven said the test his group staged is still important because that shortcut won’t be available to regular computers when they compete with future quantum annealers capable of working on larger amounts of data.

Matthias Troyer, a physics professor at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, said making that come true is crucial if chips like D-Wave’s are to become useful. “It will be important to explore if there are problems where quantum annealing has advantages over even the best classical algorithms, and to find if there are classes of application problems where such advantages can be realized,” he said, in a statement with two colleagues.

Last year Troyer’s group published a high-profile study of an earlier D-Wave chip that concluded it didn’t offer advantages over conventional machines. That question has now been partially resolved, they say. “Google’s results indeed show a huge advantage on these carefully chosen instances.”

Google is competing with D-Wave to make a quantum annealer that could do useful work. Last summer the Silicon Valley giant opened a new lab in Santa Barbara, headed by a leading academic researcher, John Martinis (see “Google Launches Effort to Build Its Own Quantum Computer”).

Martinis is also working on quantum hardware that would not be limited to optimization problems, as annealers are. A universal quantum computer, as such a machine would be called, could be programmed to take on any problem and would be much more useful but is expected to take longer to perfect. Government and university labs, Microsoft (see “Microsoft’s Quantum Mechanics”), and IBM (see “IBM Shows Off a Quantum Computing Chip”) are also working on that technology.

John Giannandrea, a VP of engineering at Google who coördinates the company’s research, said that if quantum annealers could be made practical, they would find many uses powering up Google’s machine-learning software. “We’ve already encountered problems in the course of our products impractical to solve with existing computers, and we have a lot of computers,” he said. However, Giannandrea noted, “it may be several years before this research makes a difference to Google products.”

BIG IDEAS: Physics At The Crossroads

This is another in my occasional series on Big Ideas.  Last night I had my first opportunity to watch Particle Fever, the acclaimed 2014 documentary on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle.  I recommend it to everyone. This followed my reading of a much more recent New York Times Op-Ed this week, describing a crisis in physics resulting from the discovery of the Higgs Boson.  Essentially, the science of physics has no ability any time in the foreseeable future to experimentally go beyond the Higgs Boson.  Physics is unlikely to be able to find The Holy Grail: a unifying Theory of Everything tying Einstein and the Higgs Boson into one simple elegant explanation.

A debate has erupted among physicists around the World, regarding the fundamental scientific imperative to empirically verify theories through experiments like those at LHC. But with the scale and complexity of the experiments required outstripping human capability, the question is being raised, “Can we explicitly set aside the need for experimental confirmation of today’s most ambitious cosmic theories — so long as those theories are “sufficiently elegant and explanatory.” The emergence of this debate can clearly be seen in the Particle Fever interviews with various LHC physicists.  While I do understand the quandary we have, my fear is that science could potentially descend into competing belief systems, and give comfort to religious groups who believe the Earth is only 6000 years old. That would be an even greater catastrophe. Any comments or thoughts on this?

Particle Fever, the 2014 award winning documentary on the Large Hadron Collider and the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle. 

READ MORE: NY Times: Crisis At The Edge of Physics

A Crisis at the Edge of Physics

 

By ADAM FRANK andMARCELO GLEISER

New York Times Op-Ed, June 5, 2015

DO physicists need empirical evidence to confirm their theories?

You may think that the answer is an obvious yes, experimental confirmation being the very heart of science. But a growing controversy at the frontiers of physics and cosmology suggests that the situation is not so simple.

A few months ago in the journal Nature, two leading researchers, George Ellis and Joseph Silk, published a controversial piece called “Scientific Method: Defend the Integrity of Physics.” They criticized a newfound willingness among some scientists to explicitly set aside the need for experimental confirmation of today’s most ambitious cosmic theories — so long as those theories are “sufficiently elegant and explanatory.” Despite working at the cutting edge of knowledge, such scientists are, for Professors Ellis and Silk, “breaking with centuries of philosophical tradition of defining scientific knowledge as empirical.”

Whether or not you agree with them, the professors have identified a mounting concern in fundamental physics: Today, our most ambitious science can seem at odds with the empirical methodology that has historically given the field its credibility.

How did we get to this impasse? In a way, the landmark detection three years ago of the elusiveHiggs boson particle by researchers at the Large Hadron Collider marked the end of an era. Predicted about 50 years ago, the Higgs particle is the linchpin of what physicists call the “standard model” of particle physics, a powerful mathematical theory that accounts for all the fundamental entities in the quantum world (quarks and leptons) and all the known forces acting between them (gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces).

But the standard model, despite the glory of its vindication, is also a dead end. It offers no path forward to unite its vision of nature’s tiny building blocks with the other great edifice of 20th-century physics: Einstein’s cosmic-scale description of gravity. Without a unification of these two theories — a so-called theory of quantum gravity — we have no idea why our universe is made up of just these particles, forces and properties. (We also can’t know how to truly understand the Big Bang, the cosmic event that marked the beginning of time.)

This is where the specter of an evidence-independent science arises. For most of the last half-century, physicists have struggled to move beyond the standard model to reach the ultimate goal of uniting gravity and the quantum world. Many tantalizing possibilities (like the often-discussed string theory) have been explored, but so far with no concrete success in terms of experimental validation.

Today, the favored theory for the next step beyond the standard model is called supersymmetry (which is also the basis for string theory). Supersymmetry predicts the existence of a “partner” particle for every particle that we currently know. It doubles the number of elementary particles of matter in nature. The theory is elegant mathematically, and the particles whose existence it predicts might also explain the universe’s unaccounted-for “dark matter.” As a result, many researchers were confident that supersymmetry would be experimentally validated soon after the Large Hadron Collider became operational.

That’s not how things worked out, however. To date, no supersymmetric particles have been found. If the Large Hadron Collider cannot detect these particles, many physicists will declare supersymmetry — and, by extension, string theory — just another beautiful idea in physics that didn’t pan out.

But many won’t. Some may choose instead to simply retune their models to predict supersymmetric particles at masses beyond the reach of the Large Hadron Collider’s power of detection — and that of any foreseeable substitute.

Implicit in such a maneuver is a philosophical question: How are we to determine whether a theory is true if it cannot be validated experimentally? Should we abandon it just because, at a given level of technological capacity, empirical support might be impossible? If not, how long should we wait for such experimental machinery before moving on: ten years? Fifty years? Centuries?

Consider, likewise, the cutting-edge theory in physics that suggests that our universe is just one universe in a profusion of separate universes that make up the so-called multiverse. This theory could help solve some deep scientific conundrums about our own universe (such as the so-called fine-tuning problem), but at considerable cost: Namely, the additional universes of the multiverse would lie beyond our powers of observation and could never be directly investigated. Multiverse advocates argue nonetheless that we should keep exploring the idea — and search for indirect evidence of other universes.

The opposing camp, in response, has its own questions. If a theory successfully explains what we can detect but does so by positing entities that we can’t detect (like other universes or the hyperdimensional superstrings of string theory) then what is the status of these posited entities? Should we consider them as real as the verified particles of the standard model? How are scientific claims about them any different from any other untestable — but useful — explanations of reality?

Recall the epicycles, the imaginary circles that Ptolemy used and formalized around A.D. 150 to describe the motions of planets. Although Ptolemy had no evidence for their existence, epicycles successfully explained what the ancients could see in the night sky, so they were accepted as real. But they were eventually shown to be a fiction, more than 1,500 years later. Are superstrings and the multiverse, painstakingly theorized by hundreds of brilliant scientists, anything more than modern-day epicycles?

Just a few days ago, scientists restarted investigations with the Large Hadron Collider, after a two-year hiatus. Upgrades have made it even more powerful, and physicists are eager to explore the properties of the Higgs particle in greater detail. If the upgraded collider does discover supersymmetric particles, it will be an astonishing triumph of modern physics. But if nothing is found, our next steps may prove to be difficult and controversial, challenging not just how we do science but what it means to do science at all.

What are the historical shrines of Silicon Valley?

The answers to this question make a great tour of Silicon Valley history. I added my own answer: the historic bronze plaque commemorating Bob Noyce’s invention of the integrated circuit. It is outside the front of the old Fairchild Semiconductor building, at the corner of Ararstradero Road and Charleston Road, and is almost completely forgotten. Probably the most important invention in our generation. Like so much of Silicon Valley, it is very difficult to easily visit the most important sites or get any sense of their significance. But this list is very good.

The historical significance of some of these places will be instantly obvious, others less so. They are all important, so it’s your homework assignment.

i.e. the places of great historical significance to the technology industry … HP Garage, Googleplex, Shockley Semiconductor office, etc.

The Top 20 to my mindonScaruffi’s list include these (using his words here):

1. Stanford’s building 50, where the Physics Dept was (1891),
   next to the Memorial Church in the “quadrangle”
2. Stanford’s “Engineering Corner”, where Fred
   Terman used to work (1902)
   
3. The site where in 1909 Charles Herrold established the
   first radio broadcasting station in the world: Fairmont Tower, 50 W. San
   Fernando St & First St, San Jose
4. The site of the laboratory and factory of Federal
   Telegraph Company (1911), where Lee de Forest worked: 913 Emerson St &
   Channing Ave, Palo Alto
5. Philo Farnsworth’s laboratory (1927), where television was
   invented: 202 Green Street & Sansome, San Francisco
6. Fisher Research Laboratories (1931) was based in this
   house: 1505 Byron St, Palo Alto
   
7. Hewlett-Packard’s garage (1937), where William Hewlett and
   David Packard started their business: 367 Addison Avenue, Palo Alto
8. U.C. Berkeley campus and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
9. The location of Hewlett-Packard’s first building (1942):
   395 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto
10. Ampex’s original building (1944): 1313 Laurel St., San
    Carlos
11. The street where Varian (1948) was started: Washington St,
    San Carlos
12. IBM’s Western Lab (1952), where the Random Access Method
    of Accounting and Control (RAMAC) was built: 99 Notre Dame Street, San Jose
13. Shockley’s Laboratory (1956): 391 San Antonio Road,
    Mountain View
14. NASA Ames (1958): Moffett Blvd./NASA Parkway, Mountain
    View
15. Fairchild (1959), the site where Robert Noyce and others
    co-invented the integrated circuit: 844 E Charleston Rd, Palo Alto
16. The building that became the corporate headquarters when
    HP moved to the Stanford Industrial Park (1960) and then HP Labs (1966): 1501
    Page Mill Road, Palo Alto
17. Venture capital’s headquarters in Menlo Park (1969): 3000
    Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park
18. Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers, where Genentech’s first
    office (1975) was located and where countless start-ups were funded: 2750 Sand
    Hill Road, Menlo Park
19. Xerox PARC (1970): 3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto
20. Four Phase Systems, which started out in a former
    dentist’s office (1969): 991 Commercial St, Palo Alto

View Question on Quora

Quantum tech is more than just crazy science: It’s good business from mobile payments to fighting the NSA,

Management students may ask why the title of this post claims that quantum technology is good business. So let me try to explain, and then read on to the PandoDaily post by David Holmes. The bottom line is that some basic understanding of quantum mechanics is going to be a valuable management skill going forward. Why? Read on

Yesterday, National Public Radio in the United States (which can be heard online) broadcast a fascinating discussion about Monday’s announcement of the long awaited breakthrough of proving the existence of gravitational waves which include the fingerprint of the original Big Bang.  Featuring legendary astrophysicist Leonard Susskind of Stanford and a number of other leading physicists, the discussion inevitably drifted to quantum mechanics, and the original Big Bang itself, which Stanford Physics Professor. Chao-Lin Kuo, described as “mind scrambling.”  Quantum entanglement is another area that defies common sense: particles that mimic each other and change faster than the speed of light, which should be impossible.  Einstein’s famous quote, “God does not play dice,” was his reaction to the non-deterministic nature of quantum events and theory, which also violate his general theory of relativity. It turns out the random nature of quantum mechanics provides a superior solution for hideously complex problems, finding the best “probabilistic” solutions. Quantum mechanics is also providing a potential way forward in encryption and privacy.

Read and listen on NPR: Scientists Announce Big Bang Breakthrough

However, all of this “mind scrambling” pure science is rapidly becoming applied science: science becoming useful technological innovation and applied to economic activity.  Some of my students may recall our discussions of Moore’s Law in semiconductor design. As  Moore’s Law reaches it finite limit, quantum “technology” is creating one path forward, and providing new solutions to Internet security and supercomputing.  David Holme’s PandoDaily article today attempts to explain in greater detail why this is important for business. 

Vern Brownell, CEO of D-Wave Systems has written an excellent explanation in layman’s terms, of the importance of quantum computing, and how it differs from “deterministic” computing.

Read more:  Solving the unsolvable: a quantum boost for supercomputing

Best of all there is an excellent book for those willing to devote the time and grey matter to quantum physics, “Quantum physics, a beginners’ guide,” by Alistair Rae, available in paperback on Amazon or Kindle e-book.

Speedy qubits lead the quantum evolution

Understanding the applications of quantum computing

SUMMARY:Advances in quantum computing can have countless applications from drug discovery to investment and health care. Lockheed Martin’s collaborations with the University of Southern California and D-Wave Systems continue to push science and technology boundaries, recently quadrupling qubit capacity in the D-Wave Two machine.

tweet this

There are a few defining moments of innovation that we can point to that changed the future. Quantum computing may be that next big moment.

“Computationally, quantum computing is the equivalent of the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk,” said Greg Tallant, the program manager at Lockheed Martin.

Nearly everything around us, from cars and airplanes to smartphones and watches, has software. Debugging millions of lines of code for these increasingly complex systems is a big data problem that could cost big bucks.

“With quantum computing it’s not that we can solve problems that we cannot solve classically, it’s just that we can solve things faster,” said Daniel Lidar, the Scientific and Technical director at the University of Southern California Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center (QCC).

Unlike regular computers, quantum computers can simultaneously test all possible input combinations because they are not limited to just zeroes and ones (i.e., bits). Quantum bits, or qubits, can be both zero and one and all points in between, all at once.

A joint effort of Lockheed Martin Corporation and USC, the QCC recently upgraded to the D-Wave Two quantum computer designed with 512 qubits, increased from 128 in the original D-Wave One, both built by D-Wave Systems. The D-Wave Two is the largest programmable quantum information processor built.

“The QCC is a perfect example of industry and science coming together to advance our knowledge and quantum capabilities, pushing the boundaries of information science and technology,” said Bo Ewald, President of D-Wave Systems U.S.

Gigaom

There are a few defining moments of innovation that we can point to that changed the future. Quantum computing may be that next big moment.

“Computationally, quantum computing is the equivalent of the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk,” said Greg Tallant, the program manager at Lockheed Martin.

Nearly everything around us, from cars and airplanes to smartphones and watches, has software. Debugging millions of lines of code for these increasingly complex systems is a big data problem that could cost big bucks.

“With quantum computing it’s not that we can solve problems that we cannot solve classically, it’s just that we can solve things faster,” said Daniel Lidar, the Scientific and Technical director at the University of Southern California Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center (QCC).

Unlike regular computers, quantum computers can simultaneously test all possible input combinations because they are not limited to just zeroes and ones (i.e., bits). Quantum…

View original post 98 more words

Quantum Computing Takes Center Stage In Wake of NSA Encryption Cracking

In the late 1990’s while I was with Ascend Communications, I participated in the creation of the “point-to-point tunneling protocol” (PPTP) with engineers at Microsoft and Cisco Systems, now an Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) industry standard.  PPTP is the technical means for creating the “virtual private networks” we use at UBC, by encrypting “open” Internet packets with IPSEC 128 bit code, buried in public packets. It was an ingenious solution, enabling private Internet traffic that we assumed would last for a very long time.  It was not to be, as we now know.  Most disturbing, in the 1990’s the US Congress debated giving the government the key to all encryption, which was resoundingly defeated. Now, the NSA appears to have illegally circumvented this prohibition and cracked encryption anyway. But this discussion is not about the political, legal and moral issues, which are significant.  In this post I am more interested in exploring the question: “So now what do we do?” There may be an answer on the horizon, and Canada is already a significant participant in the potential solution.

As it happens, Canada is already at the forefront of quantum computing, a critically important new area of research and development, that has significant future potential in both computing and cryptography.  I have previously written about Vancouver-based D-Wave, which has produced commercial systems that have been purchased by Google and Lockheed Martin Aerospace.  The Institute for Quantum Computing in Waterloo, Ontario is the other major center of quantum computing research in Canada. Without taking a major diversion to explain quantum mechanics and its applications in computing and cryptography, there is a great PBS Nova broadcast, available online, which provides a basic tutorial.  The Economist article below, also does an admirable job of making this area understandable, and the role that the Waterloo research centre is playing in advancing cryptography to an entirely new level.

We need to insure that Canada remains at the forefront of this critically important new technology.

Cryptography

The solace of quantum

Eavesdropping on secret communications is about to get harder

REBLOGGED from The Economist online edition

First published May 25th 2013 

• CRYPTOGRAPHY is an arms race between Alice and Bob, and Eve. These are the names cryptographers give to two people who are trying to communicate privily, and to a third who is trying to intercept and decrypt their conversation. Currently, Alice and Bob are ahead—just. But Eve is catching up. Alice and Bob are therefore looking for a whole new way of keeping things secret. And they may soon have one, courtesy of quantum mechanics.

At the moment cryptography concentrates on making the decrypting part as hard as possible. The industry standard, known as RSA (after its inventors, Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology), relies on two keys, one public and one private. These keys are very big numbers, each of which is derived from the product of the same two prime numbers. Anyone can encrypt a message using the public key, but only someone with the private key can decrypt it. To find the private key, you have to work out what the primes are from the public key. Make the primes big enough—and hunting big primes is something of a sport among mathematicians—and the task of factorising the public key to reveal the primes, though possible in theory, would take too long in practice. (About 40 quadrillion years with the primes then available, when the system was introduced in 1977.)

Since the 1970s, though, the computers that do the factorisation have got bigger and faster. Some cryptographers therefore fear for the future of RSA. Hence the interest in quantum cryptography.

Alice, Bob and Werner, too?

The most developed form of quantum cryptography, known as quantum key distribution (QKD), relies on stopping interception, rather than preventing decryption. Once again, the key is a huge number—one with hundreds of digits, if expressed in the decimal system. Alice sends this to Bob as a series of photons (the particles of light) before she sends the encrypted message. For Eve to read this transmission, and thus obtain the key, she must destroy some photons. Since Bob will certainly notice the missing photons, Eve will need to create and send identical ones to Bob to avoid detection. But Alice and Bob (or, rather, the engineers who make their equipment) can stop that by using two different quantum properties, such as the polarities of the photons, to encode the ones and zeros of which the key is composed. According to Werner Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, only one of these two properties can be measured, so Eve cannot reconstruct each photon without making errors. If Bob detects such errors he can tell Alice not to send the actual message until the line has been secured.

One exponent of this approach is ID Quantique, a Swiss firm. In collaboration with Battelle, an American one, it is building a 700km (440-mile) fibre-optic QKD link between Battelle’s headquarters in Columbus, Ohio, and the firm’s facilities in and around Washington, DC. Battelle will use this to protect its own information and the link will also be hired to other firms that want to move sensitive data around.

QuintessenceLabs, an Australian firm, has a different approach to encoding. Instead of tinkering with photons’ polarities, it changes their phases and amplitudes. The effect is the same, though: Eve will necessarily give herself away if she eavesdrops. Using this technology, QuintessenceLabs is building a 560km QKD link between the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, which organises many of NASA’s unmanned scientific missions, and the Ames Research Centre in Silicon Valley, where a lot of the agency’s scientific investigations are carried out.

A third project, organised by Jane Nordholt of Los Alamos National Laboratory, has just demonstrated how a pocket-sized QKD transmitter called the QKarD can secure signals sent over public data networks to control smart electricity grids. Smart grids balance demand and supply so that electricity can be distributed more efficiently. This requires constant monitoring of the voltage, current and frequency of the grid in lots of different places—and the rapid transmission of the results to control centres. That transmission, however, also needs to be secure in case someone malicious wants to bring the system down.

In their different ways, all these projects are ambitious. All, though, rely on local fixed lines to carry the photons. Other groups of researchers are thinking more globally. To do that means sending quantum-secured data to and from satellites.

At least three groups are working on this: Thomas Jennewein and his team at the Institute for Quantum Computing in Waterloo, Canada; a collaboration led by Anton Zeilinger at the University of Vienna and Jian-Wei Pan at the University of Science and Technology of China; and Alex Ling and Artur Ekert at the Centre for Quantum Technologies in Singapore.

Dr Jennewein’s proposal is for Alice to beam polarisation-encoded photons to a satellite. Once she has established a key, Bob, on another continent, will wait until the satellite passes over him so he can send some more photons to it to create a second key. The satellite will then mix the keys together and transmit the result to Bob, who can work out the first key because he has the second. Alice and Bob now possess a shared key, so they can communicate securely by normal (less intellectually exhausting) terrestrial networks. Dr Jennewein plans to test the idea, using an aircraft rather than a satellite, at some point during the next 12 months.

An alternative, but more involved, satellite method is to use entangled photon pairs. Both Dr Zeilinger’s and Dr Ling’s teams have been trying this.

Entanglement is a quantum effect that connects photons intimately, even when they are separated by a large distance. Measure one particle and you know the state of its partner. In this way Alice and Bob can share a key made of entangled photon pairs generated on a satellite. Dr Zeilinger hopes to try this with a QKD transmitter based on the International Space Station. He and his team have been experimenting with entanglement at ground level for several years. In 2007 they sent entangled photon pairs 144km through the air across the Canary Islands. Dr Ling’s device will test entanglement in orbit, but not send photons down to Earth.

If this sort of thing works at scale, it should keep Alice and Bob ahead for years. As for poor Eve, she will find herself entangled in an unbreakable quantum web.

From the print edition: Science and technology

Larry Ellison’s Extremely High Tech 2013 America’s Cup Defense on SF Bay

BMC Oracle 72 foot America’s Cup Catamaran on San Francisco Bay

This year’s America’s Cup Defense is a Tour de Force of technological innovation both on and off the water,  Read on and I will explain. The America’s Cup events are hosted by the Golden Gate Yacht Club on San Francisco Bay, and the defending team BMC Oracle, led by none other than Larry Ellison, Chairman and founder of Oracle in Silicon Valley.  The qualifying races are being held on San Francisco Bay. Every aspect of this has been planned in advance to showcase bleeding edge technology, and to turn the yacht races themselves into the spectator sport The America’s Cup has never been,  IMHO, it is all classic Larry Ellison.

In 2003, I had just agreed to join New Zealand Trade & Enterprise to operate its high tech incubator facility in Redwood City.  My first official event was a head to head America’s Cup yacht race on San Francisco Bay.  Larry Ellison with his boat, Oracle, had challenged the Swiss team of Alinghi to a head to head race on the Bay. In what became known as the “Fiasco in Frisco,”  Alinghi lost miserably to BMW Oracle.   But the background story was even more interesting, and that 2003 race on the Bay can be looked back on as Ellison “beta testing” the idea of holding an America’s Cup Defense on San Francisco Bay.

Alinghi was skippered by Russell Coutts, a Kiwi, and a number of other Olympic class sailors from New Zealand.  In the midst of the previous America’s Cup Defense in the Hauraki Gulf off Auckland, New Zealand, Coutts had jumped ship from Team New Zealand to skipper the Swiss boat, which caused unprecedented uproar in New Zealand, where only two things matter: rugby and sailing.  When Coutts and Alinghi arrived in San Francisco for the Oracle race, New Zealand decided to officially “bury the hatchet” with Coutts.  New Zealand’s Ambassador to the U.S. at that time, John Wood, came out to San Francisco from D.C., and we threw a classic Kiwi party at the Maritime Museum to honor Coutts and his Kiwi mates.  In my first official event for New Zealand, I got to see all of the Kiwi traits and the politics played out.

Fast forward to 2013.  Coutts was fired by Alinghi in 2004, and now skippers BMW Oracle for Ellison. Shortly after it was announced that the America’s Cup Defense by Oracle, would be held on San Francisco Bay, it became clear that Ellison was determined to make every aspect of the yacht races a showcase for the latest Silicon Valley technology.

First, the Bay itself is a stunning backdrop for the event, like no other past America’s Cup venue.  Spectators line up from The Golden Gate and Fort Point all the way down to the America’s Cup wharf past Pier 39.  No other venue has been able to do this.  In an amusing sidelight.  Ellison bought a huge Pacific Heights home with a huge window overlooking the Bay, with the intent of hosting America’s Cup parties there. The only problem was an elderly couple who lived below and whose trees blocked the view.  In California, normally, there is no legal recourse: the owners of the trees are safe in the right to leave them as they are.  But Ellison hired a Marin County attorney, a “tree” specialist, in an effort to force the neighbors to cut down their trees.   I believe the jury is still out.

Second, the new 72 foot catamarans are completely new technological marvels.  Capable of speeds in excess of 37 knots, the cats employ huge kevlar wings rather than sails. A professional Kiwi sailor and friend, described these America’s Cup boats as “man killers.”  Indeed, my friend was right, as a famous British sailor was killed in May when his boat turned “turtle” in the Bay and he drowned.  Numerous additional safety measures have since been implemented.  These catamarans also employ “foils” which enable them to rise up out of the water completely and sail on their tiny wings, enabling the amazing boat speeds.  Foiling is the key to winning this America’s Cup.

Finally, the television technology has already been nominated for an Emmy.  Years ago, when the America’s Cup was held in San Diego, Silicon Graphics experimented with advanced animated graphics for television, and there was live video from the boats, but it was only a small glimpse into the technology being employed for this year’s America’s Cup.. If you have not yet watched a few minutes of the racing, do yourself a favour and do so. You will become hooked on America’s Cup yacht racing.  That has never happened before because it was nearly impossible to convey what was going on, and to make it exciting. No more.  As you watch a race on the Bay, you will see colored lines and arrows on the water, making the progress understandable. Even more amazing, there are arrows showing the airflow over the boats wings, and arrows on the water displaying the treacherous tidal flows in and out of San Francisco Bay as the boats race.  Now I know why no one ever escaped from Alcatraz.

The Italian Team, Luna Rossa beat Sweden’s Artemis to lead up to the finals, but the smart money is on Emirates New Zealand and BMW Oracle as the boats to watch.. Grab some popcorn and watch the fun on your HD TV, wishing you were down on the Bay, watching the races live.

Related articles

• Tech tycoon Larry Ellison on NSA surveillance (cbsnews.com)

Integrated Big Data, Cloud, and Smart Mobile: One Big Deal or Not?

IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: One Big Deal or Not?

by David Mayes on Jul 10, 2013

This IEEE Talk discusses the three biggest trends in online technology and proposes that in fact, they represent one huge integrated trend that is already having a major impact on the way we live, work and think. The 2012 Obama Campaign’s Dashboard mobile application, integrating Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile is perhaps the most significant example of this trend, combining all three technologies into one big thing. A major shakeout and industry consolidation seems inevitable. Additional developments as diverse as the Internet of Things, Smart Grid, near field communication, mobile payment processing, and location based services are also considered as linked to this overall trend.

IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? from David Mayes

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? Presentation Transcript

• 1. Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: Integrated Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 1
• 2. IEEE: UBC Okanagan Wednesday, February 6th, 2013 ©David Mayes 2
• 3. Speaker Introduction IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 3
• 4. David Mayes: LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mayo615 Personal Blog: http://mayo615.com UBC Office: EME 4151 (250) 807-9821 / Hours by appt. Email: david.mayes@ubc.ca mayo0615@gmail.com Mobile: (250) 864-9552 Twitter: @mayo615 Experience: Executive management, access to venture capital, International business development, sales & marketing, entrepreneurial mentorship, technology assessment, strategic planning, renewable energy technology. Intel Corporation (US/Europe/Japan), 01 Computers Group (UK) Ltd, Mobile Data International (Canada/Intl.), Silicon Graphics (US), Sun Microsystems (US), Ascend Communications (US/Intl.), P-Cube (US/Israel/Intl.), Global Internet Group LLP (US/Intl.), New Zealand Trade & Enterprise. IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 4
• 5. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 5
• 6. Some Historical Context IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 6
• 7. Canada’s McLuhan: The First Hint “The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image of a global village.” Marshall McLuhan, “Gutenberg Galaxy”, 1962, Canadian author, educator, & philosopher (1911 – 1980) IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? Video: The “McLuhan” Scene from Annie Hall © David Mayes 7
• 8. Stuart Brand, Jobs & Woz: The Whole Earth Catalog IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 8
• 9. Grove, Noyce and Moore IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? “We had no idea at all that we had turned the first stone on something that was going to be an $80 billion business.” -Gordon Moore ©David Mayes 9
• 10. Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Vin Cerf IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 10
• 11. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 12. The Emergence of SoMoClo IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? Social + Mobile + Cloud ©David Mayes 12
• 13. Emergence of Social Media IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 13
• 14. 2012 Social Media Market Landscape IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 14
• 15. Emergence of “Cloud Computing” IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 15
• 16. Emergence of End-user Cloud Apps IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 16
• 17. 2012 Cloud Enterprise Players IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 17
• 18. The Key Issue: Data Privacy Reliability, and Security Despite reassurances, there is no permanent solution, no silver bullet. The only solution is to unplug IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 18
• 19. Recent Cyber Security News: • Google Chairman, Eric Schmidt’s new book on China: • “the world’s most active and enthusiastic filterer of information” as well as “the most sophisticated and prolific” hacker of foreign companies. In a world that is becoming increasingly digital, the willingness of China’s government and state companies to use cyber crime gives the country an economic and political edge. • NY Times, WSJ hacking last week traced to China • Twitter theft of 250K users personal information last week • Sony PlayStation Anonymous hacks (twice in 2 weeks) IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 19
• 20. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 21. The Emergence of “Big Data” IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 21
• 22. Emergence of “Big Data” • Major advances in scale and sophistication of government intelligence gathering and analysis • Cost no object • NSA PRISM global telecom surveillance programPost 9/11 World IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 22
• 23. An Interesting Scientific Analogy Chaos, with reference to chaos theory, refers to an apparent lack of order in a system that nevertheless obeys particular laws or rules; this understanding of chaos is synonymous with dynamical instability, a condition discovered by the physicist Henri Poincare in the early 20th century that refers to an inherent lack of predictability in some physical systems. IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 23
• 24. Key Drivers of the Emergence of Big Data • Moore’s Law – compute cost and power • Design rules, multi-core, 3D design • Massive cost decline in data storage • Emergence of solid state memristor • Google Spanner 1st global real-time database • DARPA “Python” programming language • Data Center data storage accumulation • 2.7 zettabytes currently and growing rapidly • A zettabyte equals 1021 bytes (1000 exabytes) IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 24
• 25. The Big Data Landscape Today IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 25
• 26. The Key Issue: Privacy “Get over it! You have no privacy!” Scott McNealy, former CEO of Sun Microsystems IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 26
• 27. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 28. The Emergence of Smart Mobile IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 28
• 29. Emergence of Smart Mobile IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 29
• 30. Key Drivers of Smart Mobile • Moore’s Law – compute cost and power • Design rules, multi-core, 3D design • Focus on reducing heat: gate leakage • Intel Atom “all day battery life” is a beginning • Massive cost decline in data storage • Mobile bandwidth:4G/LTE “no cost difference” • “White space” metro Wi-Fi potential maybe • New available spectrum between digital TV channels: increased transmit power • PC market death: Dell Computer & HP IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 30
• 31. Mobile-based Services • GPS, Cloud, personal and database info on mobile • Geotagging from current location tied to your objective: • Find merchandise, restaurant, bar, etc. • Find and tag people • Find people with similar interests nearby • The rise of the mobile gaming market • Already well-established in Hong Kong, Seoul • North America far behind Asian telecom markets • Facebook has just announced LBS plans • The downside: battery drain issue still critical • “People want their phones to do too much” • 4G LTE, Wifi, Bluetooth, GPS, Streaming, Mobile Gaming IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 31
• 32. Location-based Services Landscape IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 32
• 33. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 34. The Convergence of “ToDaClo” Touch + Data + Cloud IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 34
• 35. David Mayes ‹#›
• 36. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
• 37. Discussion: Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile, Big Deal or Not? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 37
• 38. My Key Takeaway Points • Even from the 50,000 foot level, a shakeout and consolidation seem inevitable • A lot of people are going to lose a lot of money • There will be “snake oil” sold that does not work • Nevertheless these three new markets are actually one unified market, and likely: The Next Big Thing IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 38
• 39. What Do You Think? • No. ToDaClo is mostly media hype, and not a “Big Deal.” • I’m skeptical. ToDaClo will probably be a “Big Deal,” but I haven’t seen much yet • Maybe. I do not know yet whether ToDaClo will be a Big Deal • Yes. ToDaClo is a Big Deal and it is already changing our lives IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 39
• 40. Thank You! IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not? ©David Mayes 40
• 41. ©David Mayes 41