Friendly IoT or Daemon of WarGames

Is the Internet dangerous? Well, yes, we know all the hazards of spending all the work hours behind monitor screens, browsing the web at home, doing social networking, playing online games, watching YouTube, staring at smartphone little displays, or for whatever reasons we sit above our keyboards most of the time every day. That's indeed what we first think of—all the negative aspects of the mighty global network—but today I am not referring to all the potential medical issues inherited from sitting too long on the chair or looking every day into the LCD screen. I also don't mean the obvious social and/or physiological outcomes from letting the virtual world take over the real one for more and more people every day. No, I mean the real danger. Did the Internet overcome the pure network system and become a tool for mass destruction or a background tool for criminal activities? Can someone use the internet to hurt somebody or to perform a murder? Either directly or indirectly? Can some organization, country, or corporation use it to start a war? I mean, wars in the past began by more trivial things than by one global network. There was one war in the year 1969 between El Salvador and Honduras, initiated by a football game. True story. Google it.

You can relax. The Internet is still far from being a player. Or a rifle. It is getting sophisticated by the day, but currently it is still lacking two things to become something more than just a network. Two things are in development as we speak. And yes. You can stop relaxing now. The Internet IS going to be potentially capable and very dangerous when these two things become reality in the future. Very near future, if you ask me. And one of those two doesn't even have to be perfect. Like any other internet thingies, they have cool acronyms. AI and IoT. The first one will provide internet to be self-aware... or... in simple words, to start thinking. It means 'Artificial Intelligence', of course, and even though current development is far away from creating a real replacement for a human mind, some sort of NAI (near AI) will be sufficient to act independently on many occasions. NAI is not real AI. It is rather a complex logic that emulates thinking behavior in some spatial scenarios with predefined and predicted all or most of all directions and events. For example, the current two operational robotic rovers on Mars, Curiosity and Opportunity, are capable of driving on their own with their operating software. Or here on Earth, many metro systems in large cities are operated by complex control and are fully automated, without humans behind train controls. Something like in this embedded video was unthinkable only a couple of decades ago.

To be honest, true AI is not really a real threat. Even if science and technology build an AI entity tomorrow with certain doses of emotions and reason, it will be just another child in the neighborhood. True danger in the background of the global worldwide web is only the programmer's anticipation and powerful IF-THEN-ELSE command. And we have both today. AI being a mad mastermind of the future is not needed. The only thing preventing the Internet from being dangerous today is the still-early phase of IoT. "Internet of Things". Think of it like this: if you have brains and no body or senses, you are as good as a conductor without an orchestra. This is the inevitable part of the future Internet. It will get a body and a wide variety of sensing abilities. Basically, until now, IP addresses were reserved for devices with brains, or CPU units if you will. Home computers, business servers, phones, tablets, smart TVs, and microcontrollers are happy units today with internet access and proud owners of IP addresses. The trend is for tomorrow that all technology-based devices get online too. Remote controllers, motion sensors and any type of sensing converters, home and kitchen appliances, cars and any type of vehicle, industry tools, medical sensors, 3D printers, clothing items, and literally anything at all will be able to get a 'smart patch' and be allowed to be monitored or controlled over the internet. Think of this futuristic network from today's Google and Android smartphone perspective.

If you are a user of Google networks and devices (like I am, and this is just an example; the same goes for other providers and internet giants), from their databases (and I am not saying that they are doing it), it's possible to know what you are browsing to the simplest detail by your usage data in searching the net and the history of your browser, who you are following on social networks by which timeline or wall pages you are opening the most, what you like and dislike, what your watching habits are by your YouTube statistics, how your life looks in writing by your usage of Blogger, and all your whereabouts of your Android smartphone by Google Timeline. Not to mention that they have access to all of your online photos, videos, and files through your usage of all of their services and cloud storage. Oh, yes, and they have all your passwords you typed on various websites. Google is not even on the top of potential 'smart' providers with access to your, well, everything. If you are a user of, for example, Microsoft or Apple and their operating systems, then they are able (and again, I am not saying they are doing it) to know and have access to your localized data that is not clouded online. The story continues into the business environment further. If you are the proud owner of a rack of servers in some cool data storage building and you didn't write all the software and used so-called 'third party' code, the simple fact is that you are not the only one with potential access to all of your racks. And you are not the only one capable of monitoring all the network traffic. Those who manufactured network cards can do it too. Again, I am not saying that big internet corporations are doing all those spying and sniffing of people and other entities online, just that if they wanted to, it would be technologically possible.

Anyhow, all the worries of today's digital world end with privacy concerns. If you are a villainous criminal or a mad hacker, all you can do is steal somebody's identity data and log into other people's accounts for whatever malicious reasons you would do that, but you can't physically and directly harm somebody. In the past I have had these encounters with online thieves, and one of them cracked my password, logged into my dial-up account, and used free internet for a while until I went physically to the internet provider and overrode him for good. After that experience, I am creating complex passwords, and on a couple of occasions, they are so complex that even I forget them after a few weeks. I guess now is as good a time as any to thank all those "Forgot your password?" links standing timidly next to login forms.

However, the Internet of Things will have the power to end all of those 'benignities' of today's online world. Smartphones will not be the only systems with a 'smart' prefix. I am imagining all the varieties of SmartHomes, SmartCars, SmartShips, SmartRoads, SmartOffices, SmartFields, SmartTraffic, SmartEnergy, SmartPolitics... Ok, let's not push it. Some things will never happen. Nevertheless, and seriously speaking, even though this post looks like I am against the future breakthrough in the Internet size and means, many of the IoT-based gadgets will be extremely helpful. Think of the future SmartForest with many embedded fire sensors and intelligent surveillance cameras or SmartHealth gadgets actively monitoring your health signs and alarming anything potentially hazardous, either from within your body or by sensing bad food or air or any type of toxin in your near proximity. Surely every bright medal has the opposite side, and with the possibility of accessing all the gadgets online and controlling them from a distance, I am more than positive that we will be facing SmartViruses as well, and still, just people's passwords to access their mailboxes or bank accounts will be completely dwarfed by the online crime of entering somebody's house system and starting to leak gas while everybody is sleeping.

I am not quite sure that the Internet of Things will exactly be "The Fourth Industrial Revolution", but in one way or another, after a decade or so of transition years, it will be our everyday reality, and the next generations will embrace it and take it for granted just like we do with our current technological surroundings. Or our fathers and grandfathers and their lives within old-fashioned telegraphs, radios, and CRT television sets. Or their fathers and grandfathers with newspapers and books.

Anyways, we will be dealing with IoT when it happens, and I am sure I will be writing about it in general or in specifics on this blog or elsewhere in the future, but today I only want to end this story with a recommendation of one great related novel. About thirty years ago, I was watching WarGames on one of my first VCRs, and it instantly became one of my favorite films. I was more or less the same age as Matthew Broderick back then, in the middle 80s, when he played the lead role in the movie, and needless to say, I spent numerous hours watching it again and again and even read David Bischoff's book based on the original screenplay and enjoyed it all the same. At least for me, it was definitely an influential book of the decade. Every now and again in the previous thirty years, after WarGames, I was wondering why no decent book or movie was made to represent the real successor of the original story only in the realm of nowadays' Internet instead of WarGames' military background. And after three decades, finally, last week, on a friend's recommendation, I purchased Daniel Suarez's "Daemon". In the 'book' thread of the blog, I reviewed many titles without much of a spoiler, and to continue in the same fashion, all I can say is that it's one of those books you hate to leave, and as I am very close to the end, I don't see what would happen to force me to not give it a full five stars. "Daemon" is exactly what I was expecting after WarGames. I read that Walter F. Parkes, co-writer of the original WarGames screenplay and producer of the Man in Black movies, was interested in producing the movie "Daemon" and its sequel, "Freedom" (or "Darknet" in some editions), but this is still in "the clouds", probably due to the extremely technical plot and twists. Perhaps "Daemon" is more suitable for a mini-series or sci-fi TV show... Time will tell.

As for me, my time in the near future is locked and reserved for "Freedom", eagerly waiting in my Kindle's memory. With the same enthusiasm, I am embracing a not-so-near future full of "Internet Things" and what they will bring to our technocracy.

Image refs:
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/iot-brings-potential-security-threats
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/WarGames-Blu-ray/47282/
http://www.amazon.com/War-Games-David-Bischoff/dp/0440193877
http://www.amazon.ca/Freedom-TM-Daemon-Daniel-Suarez-ebook/dp/B002VUFKDY
https://3dprint.com/113502/iot-2015-person-of-the-year/

Refs:
https://re-work.co/blog/embrace-the-iot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_subway_systems
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2014/05/13/IoT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_of_Things
http://www.amazon.com/War-Games-David-Bischoff/dp/0440193877
http://www.amazon.ca/Daemon-Daniel-Suarez-ebook/dp/B003QP4NPE/

History of (d)SLR

The year was 1975 when I was browsing a small dusty workshop located next to the garage in our backyard. It was a perfect combination; I was about to turn 7 years old, eager to explore the darkest corner of my childhood realm, and the dark workshop was the most mysterious chamber in our entire family estate, no bigger than four cubic meters, occupied by a heavy and old greenish oak cabinet with a couple of drawers and compartments filled with tons of different tools, mechanical devices, and various interesting stuff whose origin and purpose I didn't know. It was, more or less, the year when I started to break things in order to find out what was inside or to find out how something works, foolishly believing that I would be perfectly able to put things back together.

Well, from this point of view in time, I can't remember if there was at least one mechanical device I "inspected" in such a manner that I successfully restored after unscrewing all the bolts and junctures or by simply breaking the metal hood. One thing is for sure, though. What I found that summer morning in the workshop I definitely never managed to restore. I simply succeeded in dismantling the old thing beyond any possibility for repair. But the knowledge I gained from what I found inside was priceless. It was something I had never seen before. When I broke the hard metal hood of an old binocular I found hidden in one old bag stored in the old oak, at first glance I thought I had found a treasure. Two shiny, perfectly aligned, and beautifully shaped objects smiled at me from the inside of the optical instrument. I was too young to understand what their purpose was, but in the following days I learned everything about it. That very day I discovered a prism. Two of them.

Needless to say, I instantly became attached to my newest discovery to the point that I kept them with me all the time. I was carrying them to the school and bragging about their almost magical abilities of bending light in different directions. Well, I wasn't any different from any other kid at that age. Only in this case with a little twist. Guess what the twist is? I still have one of them (above photo).

Leica IIIa, rangefinder camera, 1935-38 (responsible for the kiss photo**)

After almost 40 years, one prism survived and is more or less in the expected shape after four decades, still playing with photons the same as years before. But this is not the end of the story about this particular prism. The history of the little thing goes even more into the past. Actually this binocular belonged to my grandfather, who brought it directly from World War II. Some 30 years before I found it hidden in an old cabinet, my grandfather was experiencing the final year of his captivity in one of those German camps for military personnel imprisoned back in the year of 1941. After German capitulation, he was traveling half of Europe on foot, trying to find his way home, carrying these binoculars with him. Sometimes, I wonder what exactly little prism saw in these turbulent years, changing who knows how many owners during the war, and how many untold stories are lost forever and hidden in little crystals now perhaps more than 80 years old.

But to get back to the title story, basically the technology behind the acronym is connected to the camera's solution of how the photographer's eye is monitoring the shooting object. In the history of photo cameras, way back in the 19th century, the first professional cameras were designed with two objective lenses, perfectly aligned and with the same focal length, one for taking the light to the photographic film and the other toward the viewfinder. The single-lens system was a natural step forward, where a mirror-prism system mounted between the lens and film forced light to make a couple of sharp turns and to end directly at the viewfinder. The result is obvious: the framed image shown in front of your eye is the one forming the final picture after the mirror is lifted up and the photographic film is lit during the desired exposure time. What is also obvious is that the more quality the objective lens, mirror, pentaprism, and eyepiece are manufactured with, the better the image you see in the viewfinder before the final moment of triggering the shutter mechanism. The other non-optical part of analog-era SLR photo cameras directly responsible for the quality of the final product is, of course, the sensitivity of photographic film as well as the quality of embedded microscopically small light-sensitive silver-based crystals responsible for the contrast and resolution of the film. Back then, in the analog era, the photographing process didn't end by clicking the button. The film needed to be chemically developed, and with another optical/chemical process of illumination, the negative taken images are finally transferred to the photo paper.

If you were a photo enthusiast back in the seventies and eighties of the previous century like my father was, you might imagine that having a proper camera along with a photo laboratory with a darkroom was not a very cheap hobby. But thousands of images were worth all the effort. My favorite memories from those days were all connected to spending hours in a dark photo room with a red light producing pictures on paper. The moment of the image appearing on the surface of photo paper submerged in a dilute solution, followed by washing the photograph with fixer liquid and water, was my favorite part. I was typically in charge of these final steps in the process along with hanging wet photos for final drying. In this part of Europe in those times, the best amateurish and semi-professional cameras and all the equipment needed for a photo laboratory for hobbyists, with all the chemicals and supporting devices, came from East Germany and Russia. My father owned a couple of those-day cameras, and the one I remember the most was the Zenit E/EM (pictured to the left), manufactured a couple of years before the Olympics in Moscow in 1980. Zenit was made by KMZ (Красногорский завод), a leading Russian enterprise in the area of optical and electro-optical engineering, and you would be amazed how nice photos this little fellow made 25-30 years ago.

In conclusion, after a little history and technicalities, in the final chapter of this blog post, let's talk a little about digital SRLs. Basically, optical systems used in old cameras are the same. Two things changed, though. The quality of manufacturing of all optical parts in nowadays photo cameras is far more advanced than before, and all aspects of the final image are increased to the edge. There is a software term in the early digital era called WYSIWYG, meaning "What You See Is What You Get", which initially referred to printing documents looking the same as seen on the display of your computer. I guess the photo industry today reached the same goal, and with not even too expensive lenses and moderate DSLR cameras, final photos reached the quality of the image appearing in viewfinders or the one seen with your naked eye. The second major change is in the simple fact that all the chemical industry and paper photos are replaced by pure digital systems. Film is removed by a light sensor in the form of an electronic chip filled with a matrix of millions of tiny analog-to-digital converter dots capable of instantly saving an image into a fast memory card. Perhaps the third change is the fact that each DSLR device today is also a specialized computer, and compared to old systems, they are now able to perform various post-processing procedures to assist you with intelligent zooming, face recognition, adapting to shooting conditions, filming entire video clips, and maintaining a detailed database of taken images.

Nikon D5200 dSLR and Zenit EM SLR*

Considering all the features of one DSLR, I can surely say that this one device replaces my father's entire environment, from the camera through the darkroom for developing photographs to the bulk photo albums where final photos are stored. And all that with a smaller price, and what's more important, with far more space for creativity and for taking photos in a professional manner. To me, today's worldwide market is taken by two big players, Canon and Nikon, Japanese multinational corporations, both specialized in the manufacture of imaging and optical products, especially in the market of digital SLR cameras. It wasn't easy to choose one of their models, and I took several days of browsing stores and reading about all the specifications, but I eventually chose the Nikon D5200 that fits all the requests and budget I had in my mind.

At the very end let's speculate a little about how the future of photo cameras might look. Will it be further development and improvement in optical and digital systems or with the upcoming ultimate speed of future computer circuits or with the introduced quantum computers that the digital system will "evolve back" to the analog world? It remains to be seen. One thing is for sure though: miniaturization of optical systems is still not possible by the simple fact that the more photons you get in the sensor, the better the image is saved, and in this case, size really matters.

Ref:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/viewfinders.shtml

*
http://www.theothermartintaylor.com/moveabletype/archives/cameras/000005.html
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d5200.html

**
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313418/Times-Square-kiss