Tech Trend 247

A company headquartered in Auckland, New Zealand has played an integral role in global mass surveillance, according to a new report.

Based on documents and emails leaked to The Intercept, Endace has quietly been selling its technology to government agencies, allowing them to gather vast quantities of "private emails, online chats, social media conversations, and internet browsing histories."

Founded in 2001, the company claims to deliver "the world's best network monitoring and recording systems," producing technology that can help clients intercept and monitor online traffic. It boasts "100 percent accurate capture and storage of network traffic." 

TVNZ, which also worked on the story, reported that Endace founder Ian Graham shed light on how some of its technology worked in a 2004 news story.

"[Endance had] developed equipment that allowed customers to 'see a copy of all the internet traffic passing that point.' He said 'we put a time stamp on it and feed it to software which gets out the information that the user needs.'"

According to a leaked client list, customers apparently include government agencies in Australia, Canada and Israel, among others. 

The Intercept also reported Endace had sold assets to DGST, the Moroccan spy agency, which has been implicated in serious human rights abuses.

Corporate clients also include Australia's largest telco company, Telstra, as well as AT&T in the U.S.

On its website, Endace says it works with "5 of the top 10 global telcos" and "Top US, European and APAC government and defence departments."

One important customer according to The Intercept, is UK spy agency, Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). 

"The records of Endace sales are confirmed by internal GCHQ documents, provided by Snowden, which describe the company's data capture devices being used as part of mass surveillance programs ... documents from 2010 and 2011 repeatedly mention the Endace products while discussing the capture of "internet-derived" data to extract information about people's usage of services such as Gmail, Hotmail, WhatsApp, and Facebook."

In order to capture ever growing amounts of internet traffic for GCHQ, Endace began work on a product called Medusa, with the ability to hoover traffic at up to 100 gigabits per second from trans-continental undersea cables.

According to the report, it's also possible Endace used public money from the New Zealand government to develop the surveillance gear for GCHQ.

The Intercept has published the leaked documents on its site.

Apple just released iOS 10.1, the first major update to the iPhone and iPad's mobile operating system since iOS 10 launched in September.

For iPhone 7 Plus users, the update officially brings Portrait mode, the camera feature that creates photos with a blurred-out background. Portrait mode will continue to be an ongoing public beta, but iPhone 7 Plus users no longer need to install the public beta in order to get it.

As always, the easiest way to update your iPhone, iPad or iPod touch to iOS 10.1 is to go to Settings > General > Software Update and download it over-the-air (OTA).

iOS 10.1 weighs about 200MB and we recommend connecting to a Wi-Fi network to download adn install it instead of eating into your data plan.

If the update is taking forever to download, your best option is to try again later when Apple's servers aren't being slammed by everyone simultaneously downloading it.

Alternatively, you can also connect your supported iOS device to your PC or Mac and update through iTunes. 

The full iOS 10.1 release notes from Apple include:

iOS 10.1 is available for the following iOS devices:

• iPhone: iPhone 5, iPhone 5C, iPhone 5S, iPhone SE, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6S, iPhone 6S Plus, iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus

• iPad: iPad 4, iPad Air, iPad Air 2, iPad mini 2, iPad mini 3, iPad mini 4, iPad Pro 9.7, iPad Pro 12.9

• iPod touch: iPod touch (sixth-generation)

As a precaution, we also recommend backing up your data with iCloud or to a computer via iTunes beforehand to prevent any accidental data loss during the update process. It's rare you'll lose any data, but it's always better to be safe than sorry.

Google Photos is also a great way to keep a backup of all your photos and videos. If you go with the free tier, you'll be able to store an unlimited amount of photos at up to 16 megapixels and video at up to 1080p full HD resolution; to store video at up to 4K resolution, you'll need to pay for storage.

In a move that's guaranteed to inspire awe but is really just laying the foundation for the robot takeover Elon Musk has been warning us about, IBM's artificial intelligence program Watson has helped write some music. 

Alex Da Kid, a Grammy-winning producer, got all sorts of data from Watson that helped him craft the song "Not Easy," a collaboration with X Ambassadors, Elle King, and Wiz Khalifa. 

So how did Watson help? Well, according to IBM: 

Watson AlchemyLanguage API helped by analyzing five years of natural language texts including New York Times front pages, Supreme Court rulings, Getty Museum statements, the most edited Wikipedia articles, popular movie synopses and more. Once Watson had learned the most significant cultural themes, Watson Tone Analyzer read news articles, blogs and tweets to find out what people felt about them.

In addition to all of this fun stuff, Watson also analyzed lyrics from thousands of popular songs and the keys and chord progressions of those songs to create "an emotional fingerprint of music by year." 

Watson also ingested album art and used a "cognitive cloud-based app" called Watson Beat that, with artist input, helps put together a musical composition. 

Speaking to radio host Elvis Duran, Alex said of the song created with Watson, "My creative process starts with a conversation. And when I kind of understood what Watson could do, it could kind of take that conversation and that understanding of how people talk to each other and do that on a massive scale."

While Watson has been working on something like this for a while, there's no word on whether or not we'll see another matching of the platform and Nobel Prize-winning poet Bob Dylan, who appeared alongside Watson in an IBM commercial before apparently disappearing into the ether. 

Google won’t make the world’s fastest growing smartphone market wait for long to get its hands on the new Pixel and Pixel flagship smartphones. This is a stark deviation from the general norm that sees companies take weeks — and sometimes months — in bringing their top smartphones to India. 

Google announced today that stores across Indian cities will start selling the Pixel and Pixel XL starting Tuesday. This is a welcome move for many in the country who were hoping to grab the smartphone ahead of the Diwali festival later this month. Google unveiled the Pixel smartphones earlier this month. 

Flipkart, Google India’s online seller partner for Pixel smartphones, has also informed customers who had pre-ordered that it will begin shipping their smartphones starting tomorrow. A Google India spokesperson said that Flipkart is shipping some inventory starting today, though the general availability is Tuesday. 

The Android maker is leaving no stones unturned for what it’s calling first "Made by Google" phones. Earlier this month, Google said it had partnered with HTC India for after sales support of Pixel smartphones in the country.  

Google says it will also offer support for Pixel smartphones at 56 HTC India walk-in service centres in more than 30 cities in India. The company will also offer a toll free phone support service at 18004190655 in India. The number will be functional all days of the week between 9:00 am and 6:00 pm (local time). 

The Pixel and Pixel XL smartphones are available to purchase from Flipkart and over 1,000 retail stores in India including retail chains like Reliance Digital, Croma and Vijay Sales. Experts and users alike across the world have nice things to say about the Pixel and Pixel XL smartphones. 

 
We may have just seen a major player in the drive towards autonomous cars apply screeching brakes. Apple has reportedly abandoned its plans to build its own self-driving electric vehicle and is instead going to focus on the underlying autonomous software. A similar initiative to produce a fully autonomous car by Google also appeared to run out of steam. Building self-driving cars clearly poses a challenge that even the world’s top technology giants can’t yet meet.

So what is it about building autonomous cars that is proving to be such a challenge? The high-value consumer electronics and software industry is used to very different margins than the cut-throat automotive sector, which has tough market entry conditions and tribal supply-chain relationships. Then there is the technological challenge of effectively integrating sensing, communication and autonomous technology to deliver a genuinely safe product.

Modern vehicles, even those without self-driving technology, are making increasing use of artificial intelligence. It’s playing a critical role in increasing fuel economy, providing active safety systems, advancing navigation, and adding various driver-assistance tools that build up towards full self-driving capability. But integrating all the physical and software technologies needed for these systems is a complex task.

At the heart of this challenge is the cost of failure – human life. The recent fatal accident involving Tesla’s “autopilot” system serves as a tragic reminder of this.

Car manufacturers have traditionally had to prove the safety of their vehicles through road tests on dedicated testing tracks, as well as a series of assessments to show risks are at an acceptable level. But the increasing number of interdependent technologies within a car and their complex levels of integration ultimately means more difficult testing. This is not system testing as Apple and Google know it. Neither is the industry forgiving of system failures, as shown by the major product recalls that take place after a software glitch.

Capture and communication of personal data is another feature of modern cars. And storing details of everything from journey routes to driver behaviour adds to the growing privacy concerns about how much data on us companies collect. The technology giants have built much of their business around collecting and monetising this kind of data, but the issue is also at the heart of the latest challenge faced by Google thanks to opposition by Californian lawmakers. The commercial interest in such data makes it even more of a challenge, in privacy terms, to reach consensus on and resolve.

This problem is made worse by the issue of how secure this data is. A key element of driverless technology is the car’s ability to communicate with other systems around it. This opens a channel through which hackers could not only steal data but even take control of the car. Attacks have already been demonstrated against car’s internet connections and even their tyre pressure wireless sensors. This has already brought legal challenges for the automotive industry, with Toyota, GM and Ford subject to a class action lawsuit for “dangerous defects”.

There is also the problem of how drivers interact with autonomous technology – where human control ends and automatic control begins – that only adds more complexity. Not to mention the potential physical effects on drivers of not having to watch the road all the time. What’s more, there are serious ethical questions for designers of artificial intelligence in self-driving cars that are bound to change the dynamics of their design. For example, should a car crash itself to avoid hitting pedestrians?

The software industry has tackled many of these kinds problems over the years. But building a fully driverless car goes far beyond the software component. It requires a complex interaction of numerous digital and physical systems, each with their own technical and legal issues.

In the 1960s, American political activist Ralph Nader campaigned successfully for automotive manufacturers to bear responsibility for design defects in their cars and not shift them to car owners. Ultimately, self-driving cars will mean manufacturers also have to take responsibility for every second of operation on the roads. So far, that has proven too big a challenge for even the biggest tech firms.

• Is the government pushing for private health insurance over comprehensive care in the NHS?
• Thirty years on as 'new Cold War' looms, US and Russia should remember the Rekyjavik summit
• Anthill 6: Into the darkness
• Lessons in the Calais Jungle: teaching life stories and learning about humanity

This article originally published at The Conversation here

You may soon see a lot more NSFW content on Facebook. 

The social network is updating its community standards to allow more types of graphic or offensive content that would have previously violated its standards — if the content is deemed newsworthy or "important to the public interest."

"In the weeks ahead, we’re going to begin allowing more items that people find newsworthy, significant, or important to the public interest — even if they might otherwise violate our standards," facebook's VP of Global Policy Joel Kaplan and VP Global Operations & Media Partnerships Justin Osofsky wrote in a statement..

It's not clear how Facebook will determine what types of content are allowed going forward, but the executives noted that the social network wants to avoid showing graphic content to "minors and others who do not want to see them." Whether this would be automated or whether there would be a specific way to opt-out is unclear. 

Facebook also said it would work with publishers, journalists, members of law enforcement and others as it develops its policies. 

Facebook has grappled with censorship for some time. The social network's somewhat nebulous content policies, which already allow for some kinds of graphic content if it's a matter of public interest, have come under fire repeatedly for uneven enforcement. Earlier this year, a Norwegian newspaper published a front page editorial taking Mark Zuckerberg to task for removing a famous photograph from the Vietnam War. 

As you move towards the high-end spectrum of hi-fi, features on gadgets typically disappear. It's not uncommon to see a power amplifier, priced like a family car, with a single button, while amps that cost a few hundred bucks come with a bazillion knobs and switches. The idea is that everything that's not strictly necessary just gets in the way of that perfect sound — and perfect sound is the ultimate goal of expensive hi-fi equipment. 

It's no wonder, then that B&W's latest pair of headphones, the P9 Signature, doesn't have wireless connectivity, noise cancellation, or even a single button. The company's top-of-the-line headphones cost $900, and they promise just one thing: stellar sound. 

Judging from the week or so I've spent with them, the P9 Signature delivers, but that price tag might not be justifiable to everyone. 

Reviewing the P9 Signature, whose launch has been timed to celebrate Bowers & Wilkins' 50 years of existence, was fairly simple, as I've just finished reviewing the company's P7 Wireless headphones, B&W's priciest, best sounding headphones before the P9 came along. The two sets of cans share a similar design and sound (I was able to compare them directly), so my primary task was to figure out whether the price jump from $500 to $900 is worth it. 

Luxurious, comfortable and focused on the music

Let's start with this: If features are what you're after, you're looking at the wrong set of headphones. The P9 Signature comes with three cables (one with included volume and play/pause controls) of varying length, and an adaptor to the larger, 6.35mm audio jack (a must if you have serious hi-fi equipment at home), but that's it. There's no Lightning cable either, a must for owners of iPhone 7 (which has no audio headphone jack) though it will be shipped with the P9s starting early 2017, and those who buy them now can ask B&W for a free cable when it becomes available. 

These headphones are not meant to amuse you with gesture-based operation, smart sensors and similar shenanigans. They're meant to be the link between you and beautiful sounding music. 

Design-wise, the P9s look like a fancier version of the P7s. Brown, Italian Saffiano leather on the earcups, an Alcantara carrying case and an aluminum headband (which is, thankfully, foldable) give the headphones a distinctive, luxurious look. The P7 Wireless looks good, but when you place them next to the P9 Signature, they're just not in the same league. 

The P9s also have a hidden headphone jack — to replace a cable, you need to remove the magnetically-fastened earcup. The solution works better than it did with the P7 Wireless; you're not going to change the cables on these very often, if ever, and it keeps the headphone jack safely (and nicely) tucked away. 

Thanks to the premium materials and slightly bigger earcups, the P9 Signature are also more comfortable than the P7 Wireless — and generally very head-friendly, even though they're quite heavy at 413 grams. Both sets of headphones tend to become a bit heavy on the top of my head — uncomfortably so after an hour and a half of listening — but the effect is less pronounced with the P9s. 

A deepness in the bass

We've established that the singular goal of these headphones is great sound, but is it nine-hundred-bucks good? While the figure might sound outrageous to some, it's not uncommon in the world of high-end headphones; in fact, the world's best sounding headphones often cost several thousand dollars, which would make the B&W P9 Signature entry-level high-end hi-fi (yes, that's a lot of dashes). 

The verdict is not an easy one to give. On a technical level, the P9 Signature have slightly better specifications: their 40mm drivers have a larger frequency range (from 2Hz to 30KHz; good luck trying to hear sounds at the end of that range) and a lower distortion level, but are otherwise the same. They're also angled to provide a sound stage that's in front of you, not on the sides. And the earcups have been decoupled from the headband with a nifty little gimbal system to remove unwanted vibrations. 

But can you actually hear those differences?

The answer is yes, but it really depends on what type of listener you are. The P9 Signature headphones offer an extremely detailed sound. The bass is rich and precise, but slightly toned down compared to the P7s; it won't jump at you at every occasion, but if you focus, you'll hear it's fuller and more detailed. 

It's not just the bass; the sound of the P9s can generally be described as extremely precise, if a little dark. You'll hear it all; the hint of cold in the singer's voice, and the droning of an electric guitar left plugged in on stage at the end of a concert.  

The sound stage is moved a little to the front as promised by the angled drivers, but not vastly. In fact, if I were to point out one flaw (and that's only if I compare the sound with high-end equipment), the sound stage always sounds like a tiny club; you'll never get the feeling of being in a huge arena. 

But to hear all this, I've had to listen to CDs or flac files. And I used a 24-bit DAC audio module to connect to my MacBook Air. I've listened mostly to amazingly well-recorded music: Pink Floyd's The Wall, Ryan Adams' Live at Carnegie Hall and Nick Cave's Live from KCRW. This is where the P9s shine; put any of these on, and you'll instinctively close your eyes and lean back into the chair to listen to the song through to the end. 

If you just slap on a 128kbps mp3 of Kruder and Dorfmeister's K&D Sessions, it will still sound great (in fact, it's amazing how much these headphones can squeeze out of those compressed files), but the P7 Wireless won't lag too far behind.  

Unfortunately, I didn't have anything like the Sennheiser HD800 or the Audio Technica ATH-W5000, which fall roughly in the same price range, to compare with the P9s directly. Working from memory, the P9s are not as transparent as some of the high-end headphones I've heard; they flirt with high-end but still remain a great option for folks that just like a good dose of pop, electronic or dance music.

For long, home listening sessions

The P9 Signature headphones are beautiful, luxurious, comfortable and they sound great. The price point, while high, is still below the level of most flagship headphones from renowned hi-fi companies. Could they be a little cheaper? Probably, but they're aimed at the person who wants the best and can afford it. 

You can't have it all, though. These headphones are not the everyday workhorse cans you'll throw in your backpack and use on commutes and plane rides. They're a bit too heavy and bulky for that. Furthermore, they don't have wireless connectivity, noise cancellation, an attention button or any of the latest bells and whistles you can now get in the $200-$400 price range. If you want all that, you'll need to look elsewhere. But if curling up with some great-sounding recordings is your thing, the P9 Signature are nearly perfect.