Ever wanted to see a robot swagger? Strut? It’s actually surprisingly easy. Just dub ‘Stayin’ Alive’ over a video of what is a monumental robotic feat, walking and regaining balance when pushed. Suddenly, the triumph of the technology takes a backseat to the fact it’s almost perfectly in sync with the beat. If only the light on it’s head flashed to the rhythm.

Actually, this is an early build of what was known as ATLAS, built by Boston Dynamics and DARPA (the latter also being responsible for development of the Internet!). The purpose was to continue the evolution of self-balancing and increasing the advancement of robots, and it has most recently evolved into what is affectionately yet creepily known as Petman. You can find much more information about Petman at this link, but to give you an idea, it can do some advanced calisthenics and even change its body temperature in response to outside stimulus.

DARPA also developed another well-known, self-balancing robot to assist soldiers in the field known as Big Dog. It has an incredible ability to regainits balance after being impacted or even losing its balance on ice. If you thought the previous video was impressive, Big Dog will knock you out. Video of its capabilities is below.

If that’s enough, you can always go see Pacific Rim! Those robots are apparently piloted by humans and not autonomous, but I’m still hoping we get them soon.

This article on Ars Technica talks about a scam where people cold-call you on your phone, claim they are ‘calling from Windows,’ and they need to help you get rid of multiple viruses they have found on your PC. Needless to say it’s a scam, no one calls form a product (they would be calling from Microsoft, not Windows), and some people are being taken for hundreds of dollars and worse, as they convince you to install software that allows them to gain remote access to your system and ALL of your files.

The main hook they use is the Windows Event Viewer, which often lists errors and warnings for system events, but they are normally benign and don’t impact you or your use of the machine in any way. I have pasted an example of my own below:

As you can see, there are many errors and warnings, and that’s fine. If you looked at your own it would look very much the same. It’s an administrative tool that allows investigation of any system trouble that causes serious problems, but these rarely do. It looks serious, however, and I can understand why someone would fall for a caller claiming it shows a seriously compromised system.

These scammers are patient, and persistent. The best thing to do if you get a call like this is to tell them you know it’s a scam, they’ll scream profanities, and hang up. If you know anyone who might fall for it let them know as well, otherwise they could find themselves out of money and their sensitive data posted online.

Or, you could just turn the tables (this article, and the comments, are hilarious yet sad. I encourage you to read it to see what these people will do to get at your system and the clever ways people foil them).

MacPaint

All computer programs are written in a programming language. There are many different types of language, and the’re all an attempt to make it easier to give the computer instructions. In other words, instead of having to program in the actual ones and zeros that a machine understands, we would use a programming language that was closer to our own in terms of syntax and structure to tell it what we wanted it to do.

Over time, different languages were developed to make the process easier; Assembly, Fortran, BASIC,  COBOL, C, and that’s just to name a few. Many of these languages evolve into similar yet more functional versions (for example, C evolved into C++ which further evolved into C#).

Of course, a computer doesn’t understand any programming language, it only understands machine language; the ones and zeros of its circuits. So once a program is written, it has to be ‘compiled’ into machine language by a compiler, or in the case of assembly language, an assembler.

In case you have ever wondered what programming actually looks like, there are many resources online that can not only show you, but teach you! However, I thought you might be interested to see this page about Mac Paint and Quick Draw at the website of the Computer History Museum (I don’t know if I need to disclose that I’m a member, but I am).

What’s fascinating about this page isn’t just the history of these programs, which is actually very interesting, but also that it provides a link to the actual source code used to create them – so the lines the programmer typed in to create those programs can be downloaded from that very page. If for whatever reason you have trouble, I have hotlinked them here. They are written in assembler, which was normally platform specific, meaning a program written in that language couldn’t be used on any other system.

They are in a zip file because there are 5 different programs that create the single experience of running Mac Paint. In order to view them properly, you will need to right click on one of the programs from the zip file, choose ‘open with’ from the menu that appears, and view it in a text editor such as Notepad (in Windows) or TextEdit (on the Mac).

It’s amazing to think that just by typing in lines, the result could be something as advanced, for its time anyway, as Mac Paint.

Even when they’re a mesmerizing shade of shiny blue and cost a gasp-worthy $500,000. According to this article on Engadget, the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG E Cell will be available for the money-burning-a-hole-in-their-pocket crowd mid-2103.

Seeing as AMG is the high-end version of regular, low-end, cheap-seats, run-of-the-mill Mercedes-Benz’s, and since electric cars are always more expensive, a high price seems understandable. But the technology and approach to turning the wheels is novel; it has an electric motor for EACH WHEEL. 750 horsepower as a result. Very nice.

Even so, you’d have to drive a long time before you saved that amount of money in gas.

Research in Motion used to have THE digital device on the market, the Blackberry. In fact, it was so much the dominant device that it was actually referred to as the ‘Crackberry.’ It has the distinction of being the first mass-produced electronic device in which owners and users showed signs of addiction. Its communication and messaging services were unparalleled, and it ushered in the era of the smartphone even though it really wasn’t one.

My how times have changed.

While Apple’s iPhone is the most popular smartphone and Android the most popular mobile operating system, RIM has been left in the dust. The headline of this Ars Technica article says it all: “RIM Deathwatch: Blackberry subscriptions in ‘downward spiral.'”

I know people who still use Blackberry’s and love them, but there’s no doubt that Android phones and especially the iPhone have blown past them. They once were the industry leader, bu their inability to keep up looks like it will prove their undoing (which ht always does).

Anyone still use one? I do still see them around.

Just today, Google said it’s Google+ service has approximately 100 million users, down from the 150 million it touted as it’s annual developer’s brouhaha.

This is active users, as opposed to people who have accounts but never use them (like me).

I’m not sure how I feel about this. I have no inherent dislike of Facebook, I make the occasional post and use it to keep in touch with friends, schedule gatherings, and just generally see what’s going on. Even so, when Google+ was announced I really wanted to see it arise as a viable alternative to, if not direct competitor of, Facebook.

Sadly, that doesn’t seem to have been the case. In my own personal experience, I have found Google+ jarringly obtuse and cumbersome to use, which is in direct contrast to the genius design of their Google search page. Its concepts and ideas and philosophy are good, but its implementation is, in my opinion, lacking.

I’m going to give it another look, however, and see how it’s faring. I’m curious if any of you use Google+, and if so what you think of it, and if not, why not? I want to use it, I want it to succeed, but I just haven’t gotten the hang of it yet.

I’ll keep trying.

If you’re concerned that your real-life life isn’t affected by Facebook as much as it could be, you’ll be glad to hear about a study that indicates if your Facebook profile photo shows that you’re social, or if you have positive comments about it, then others visiting your site will consider you to be more physically attractive as well as socially attractive.

That applies to eventual significant others and all the fun that can bring, but also potential friends and even potential employers. So it turns out you shouldn’t take it lightly after all, and certainly don’t use the default picture. Put something fun!

Here is a list of Facebook photos that will apparently get you defriended so fast it will make Speedy Gonzales look like Regular Gonzales (Credit to Philip J. Fry).

I have no problem showing you my timeline – I guess I should change Stubbs the Zombie up there so people will like me better, but I just like that picture! I don’t even smoke.

So come on, be honest, did you put a lot of thought into your profile pic? Are you second guessing it now?

If you haven’t been following the lead up to Apple’s big unveiling event, you can see Engadget’s live blog of what’s going on by following this link. The iPhone 5 is the big deal everyone is going crazy over, what with it’s bigger screen and better internals, however I am more excited for the iPod touch. Ars Technica is rumoring it will have a bigger screen, retina display, better camera, and GPS capabilities. Sadly, there is no mention of a bigger capacity. If they bump it to 128GB, I will get one tomorrow. If not, Zune from eBay here I come!

Anyone following this? Anyone care? Anyone excited for the new iPhone? These things are always incredibly fun, or monumentally disappointing – we’ll have to wait and see.

This thing is the Sony HMZ-T2, a ‘personal viewer’ you can wear that simulates a 750-inch(!) screen about 6 feet away. Be aware that this is not a virtual reality headset (that would be the Oculus Rift, a device that really is worth your attention, and probably deserves a post of its own), it’s simply a personal viewer. You can watch TV or movies, play games, listen to music, whatever, as long as you have a source hooked up.

The reason I post this is because I’ve never been sure about these things. There have been others, like i-Glasses and MyVu, but no matter who makes them, or how large the virtual screen size is, it’s not actually the same as viewing a huge screen – you as the user know they are .7 inch screens you’re seeing. I do think they would have some use if you want to watch TV or listen to music while someone else is sleeping, or if your on an airplane or somewhere else that limits your access, but in general they haven’t reached the right combination of weight/comfort/not looking goofy that is needed for these things to work.

Having written this though, I want to give this new model a shot. Would you ever use one?

Sourced from Engadget.

Or maybe not. In fact, it turns out that using tech can be more stressful than traffic jams and filing taxes to name just a couple. Over at Tom’s Hardware, they have a brief write-up of a survey conducted by Crucial, a memory manufacturer, regarding stress caused by technology. It’s unbelievable some of the things people considered less stressful than using computers.

People can become addicted to technology, there is therapy for that addiction, the APA is considering making it an actual mental disorder, and retreats exist whose purpose is to get us away from technology. Even when that happens though, we get stressed because we don’t have it.

We just can’t win!

(Edit – I left out the link to the survey results! They’re up there now, or you can find them right here)