or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › NYT offers a peek inside Google's secret, robot-filled 'X' labs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NYT offers a peek inside Google's secret, robot-filled 'X' labs

post #1 of 68
Thread Starter 
Google's "X" lab, a highly-secretive research center that specializes in robotics and speculative technology, is investigating a list of 100 "shoot-for-the-stars ideas," according to a new report from The New York Times.

The lab is reportedly based in a secret location, with many of Google's own employees unaware of its existence. To uncover information about the group, the Times interviewed a dozen people about the project, none of whom were willing to be named.

One Google engineer familiar with the project said it was "run as mysteriously the C.I.A.," with an unassuming office for logistics located on the tech giant's Mountain View, Calif., campus, and a second undisclosed location for robots. The lab is also said to be modeled after the Xerox PARC labs that inspired Apple co-founder Steve Jobs and other Silicon Valley pioneers in the 1970s.

Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin reportedly worked together to come up with the list of ideas. Brin is said to be "deeply involved" in the lab, as was Page before he took over for Eric Schmidt as CEO in April.

Brin appeared to allude to the lab recently when he said that he spends his time on farther afield projects" that the company hopes will "graduate to important key businesses in the future.

Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page

Both founders reportedly have had a "longtime fantasy" of space elevators that would collect data or transport objects into space. "Google is collecting the worlds data, so now it could be collecting the solar systems data, said Rodney Brooks, a professor emeritus at M.I.T.

Rather than the software-centric engineers Google has gathered together for other teams at the company, Google X is populated with roboticists and electrical engineers, the report noted, adding that researchers have been hired from Microsoft, Nokia Labs, Stanford, M.I.T., Carnegie Mellon and New York University.

Robotics and artificial intelligence expert Sebastian Thrun is said to be a leader at the lab. Thrun invented the first driverless car, a concept that has long intrigued Google's founders and is believed to be a key area of research for the lab. According to one tipster, Google is considering it as a new business opportunity and may go so far as to manufacture driverless cars in the U.S.

Also at Google X are Andrew Ng and Johnny Chung Lee. Ng, a Stanford professor, uses neuroscience to fuel artificial intelligence research in hopes of making robots more like humans. Lee, who worked on Microsoft's Kinect device before joining Google, apparently serves as a "rapid evaluator" for the lab.

Though much of the X lab's work is years away from being released, two of the report's sources said that one of its products will be released by the end of the year.

More mundane projects for the team include work on what Google calls the "Web of things," a method of connecting everyday objects to the Internet. Items considered for online connectivity include a garden planter, coffee pot and a light bulb, the Times reported. In fact, Google announced at its I/O conference in May that it plans to release an LED light bulb that can be controlled by Android devices.

As is to be expected, Google declined to comment officially on the lab, though a spokeswoman did say that interest in speculative projects is an essential part of the company. While the possibilities are incredibly exciting, please do keep in mind that the sums involved are very small by comparison to the investments we make in our core businesses, she said.

Page himself has downplayed the size of the impact that Google's futuristic projects has on the company's bottom line. Investors have kept a close watch on Page since he took over, with some complaining that he didn't speak enough during his first earnings call as CEO in April.

There are a few small, speculative projects happening at any one time, but we are very careful stewards of shareholders money, the executive said in July. We are not betting the farm on these.

Financial analysts say investors are willing to put up with the research as long as Google's search profits remain healthy. These moon-shot projects are a very Google-y thing for them to do, the report noted BGC Partners analyst Colin W. Gillis as saying. People dont love it but they tolerate it because their core search business is firing away.
post #2 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Google's "X" lab, a highly-secretive research center that specializes in robotics and speculative technology, is investigating a list of 100 "shoot-for-the-stars ideas," according to a new report from The New York Times ...

What a waste.

All the ideas we know about (and those mentioned here as well), are more "pie-in-the-sky" than "shoot-for-the-stars."

You wouldn't see Apple or Microsoft invest a thin dime into something as absolutely ridiculous as a space elevator, or any of the rest of these futurist daydreams.

I wonder how much money was wasted on that Internet connected signalling light bulb alone? Millions probably, and all just to prove that it's possible to transmit data through a regular lightbulb.

Who will install these lightbulbs? Why would anyone transmit data over a lightbulb? We are all supposed to buy these things and then that *one* scenario, when the internet is down, but electric power is still working, we will all turn to our kitchen lightbulbs to get data?

Right. \
post #3 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

What a waste.

All the ideas we know about (and those mentioned here as well), are more "pie-in-the-sky" than "shoot-for-the-stars."

You wouldn't see Apple or Microsoft invest a thin dime into something as absolutely ridiculous as a space elevator, or any of the rest of these futurist daydreams.

I wonder how much money was wasted on that Internet connected signalling light bulb alone? Millions probably, and all just to prove that it's possible to transmit data through a regular lightbulb.

Who will install these lightbulbs? Why would anyone transmit data over a lightbulb? We are all supposed to buy these things and then that *one* scenario, when the internet is down, but electric power is still working, we will all turn to our kitchen lightbulbs to get data?

Right. \


i think its awesome that Google does stuff like this. Like you said, what other company would put money into projects like this that they wont see an immediate return on investment, if not ever, on. They are doing cool things because they are engineers in a position to put capital into their wacky ideas. If ANYTHING good comes from this, its a great thing in my opinon. more power to them.
post #4 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaquekyd View Post

i think its awesome that Google does stuff like this. Like you said, what other company would put money into projects like this that they wont see an immediate return on investment, if not ever, on. They are doing cool things because they are engineers in a position to put capital into their wacky ideas. If ANYTHING good comes from this, its a great thing in my opinon. more power to them.

Sure, but wouldn't it be even better of Google invested some money in creating something useful? Like making their own OS rather than blindly copying (and stealing) everything in sight?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #5 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

What a waste.

You wouldn't see Apple or Microsoft invest a thin dime into something as absolutely ridiculous as a space elevator, or any of the rest of these futurist daydreams.

Well MS did "invent" a bigazz touch table, The Surface...



Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I wonder how much money was wasted on that Internet connected signalling light bulb alone? Millions probably, and all just to prove that it's possible to transmit data through a regular lightbulb.

Who will install these lightbulbs? Why would anyone transmit data over a lightbulb? We are all supposed to buy these things and then that *one* scenario, when the internet is down, but electric power is still working, we will all turn to our kitchen lightbulbs to get data?

Right. \


But those lights probably aren't the compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL) that contain mercury, a toxin long associated with reproductive and neurological disorders. Once released into the environment through bulb breakage or improper disposal, mercury can convert into the highly-toxic methylmercury. This can accumulate in animal tissue, causing far-reaching environmental hazards. According to the EPA, a single environmental light bulb contains about five milligrams of mercury. Guidelines established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration list limits of 0.1 milligram of organic mercury per cubic meter. While over 86 percent of Americans have access to recycling programs, environmental light bulbs require special disposal procedures to minimize environmental impact. According to a 2007 Harris poll, one quarter of Americans do not recycle. Thus, despite regulation, environmental light bulbs are likely to end up in landfills.

And those idiots, from the head idiot on down, say Republicans want dirty air and unclean water! Yeah right!!!

Much rather have Google doing screwy things at their Google "X" lab, then the screwy things Washington is cramming down our throats! Private / Public Sector difference... One doesn't effect me or cost me anything, the other does!
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #6 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Google's "X" lab, a highly-secretive research center that specializes in robotics and speculative technology, is investigating a list of 100 "shoot-for-the-stars ideas," according to a new report from The New York Times.

The lab is reportedly based in a secret location, with many of Google's own employees unaware of its existence. To uncover information about the group, the Times interviewed a dozen people about the project, none of whom were willing to be named.

One Google engineer familiar with the project said it was "run as mysteriously the C.I.A.," with an unassuming office for logistics located on the tech giant's Mountain View, Calif., campus, [ View this article at AppleInsider.com ][/c]

So is this where Google organises its "CIA" type raids to steal other peoples ideas and IP?
post #7 of 68
These guys cant even develop a mobile OS that isnt fragmented.

How are they going to make a space elevator?"

   I am long on my shares of AAPL at $37.00

Reply

   I am long on my shares of AAPL at $37.00

Reply
post #8 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

What a waste.

All the ideas we know about (and those mentioned here as well), are more "pie-in-the-sky" than "shoot-for-the-stars."

You wouldn't see Apple or Microsoft invest a thin dime into something as absolutely ridiculous as a space elevator, or any of the rest of these futurist daydreams.

I wonder how much money was wasted on that Internet connected signalling light bulb alone? Millions probably, and all just to prove that it's possible to transmit data through a regular lightbulb.

Who will install these lightbulbs? Why would anyone transmit data over a lightbulb? We are all supposed to buy these things and then that *one* scenario, when the internet is down, but electric power is still working, we will all turn to our kitchen lightbulbs to get data?

Right. \

One place I can see this lightbulb useful is in the security industry. The guard shows up to a security post along his rounds and his tablet shows up his whereabouts and lets central command know that he made the rounds. This will allow for tracking in indoor areas that have no GPS signal. How about LED traffic lights that communicates with a traffic software app on your android phone and gives real time traffic data without having to go through a central command center that is controlled through DOT. i am not sure the usefullness of these applications, but Google's main point is that they are using a common connection platform (a light socket) and converting it into a communication node. No need to lay extra cables or wires through out a city.
post #9 of 68
After perfecting the driverless car, perhaps the X lab workers will replace themselves. That would be magical.

I'd be satisfied with self-shuffling cards. I know, pie-in-the-sky.
post #10 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Well MS did "invent" a bigazz touch table, The Surface...

The Surface wasn't a daydream idea at all.

The work that Microsoft put into Surface and other NUI projects around multi-touch interfaces and gestures found its way into real products like the Kinect, Windows Phone and soon Windows 8.

A tidbit of trivia; the Kinect-like interface seen in Minority Report came from consultation between Spielberg and the Microsoft team.
post #11 of 68
This "X-lab" is probably no more than an empty office with a photocopier, which explains the link to Xerox.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #12 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

The Surface wasn't a daydream idea at all.

The work that Microsoft put into Surface [...]

Uh, Microsoft bought Surface.
post #13 of 68
In a post-Steve world, 20 years on, if/when robotics become a primary consumer focus, Google may be our new Apple.
post #14 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Google's "X" lab, a highly-secretive research center

AKA Applidium, currently researching Siri on the iPhone 4S and how to get it to work on Android devices...
post #15 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink View Post

These guys cant even develop a mobile OS that isnt fragmented.

How are they going to make a space elevator?"

My question is who is going to step onto a space elevator that's in beta.
post #16 of 68
I think it is great that someone is prepared to do this sort of 'bleeding edge' research. This is, of course, the role that universities used to play until the bookkeepers squeezed every picogram of innovative spirit out of them. So the question then becomes, isn't it better to have this sort of work done by universities who may be willing to share any new technologies with everyone rather than having big corporations hiding new technologies behind IP walls.
post #17 of 68
I think a dedicated lab to making futuristic gagets is a waste of resources. If Sergy Brin wants to dabble in the unknown, he should use his own money, not shareholder's money. It doesn't matter if it isn't a very big percentage of revenue. The principle of waste not want not is more important.

I think that companies should take risks when making products. However, the innovation should happen within the realm of a product that the company intends to market and sell in the forseeable future. The futuristic stuff that works is just as likely, if not more likely to come from people working on real world products as it is from a brain trust of rich kids playing with fancy lego sets.
post #18 of 68
Well, someone ought to be sinking some money into this stuff, so why not Google? I want a robot girlfriend before I'm too old to enjoy her, goddammit.
post #19 of 68
Every time I come to read this forum, it kills me. It's kind of like looking in from an observation window at a psych ward -- some of you are truly out to lunch and obviously exist in a reality parallel to the one the rest of one live in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Uh, Microsoft bought Surface.

Uh, No.
post #20 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink View Post

These guys cant even develop a mobile OS that isnt fragmented.

How are they going to make a space elevator?"

And Apple can't even make a phone that maintains a majority of marketshare.

It's fun making super selective and irrelevant arguments, isn't it?
post #21 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filmantopia View Post

In a post-Steve world, 20 years on, if/when robotics become a primary consumer focus, Google may be our new Apple.

Robots will probably follow a similar path as most consumer electronics products... expensive and limited in function initially, and growing in popularity as cost decreases and usefulness improves. But the question is, what do consumers need or want from robots? Maids? Butlers? Companions? Pet caretakers? Robots with narrow skills will slowly be replaced with general purpose humanoid robots that will be able to perform innumerable tasks, often better than humans. Watch for the eventual merging of immortal robot body and human consciousness... in 30 to 40... or 50 years.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #22 of 68
You guys sound like the old men who sit on their porches and shake their canes at the "goddarned kids these days" who listen to music with their car windows down and laugh exuberantly when they're talking to friends. You should take a second to consider how many commonplace items that we depend on daily were at some point hopeless R&D money pits. If you went back to 1940 and told someone that you wanted to invent an worldwide network that would allow anyone to find any piece of information available to the public in under thirty seconds they would laugh you out of the room. Or look at cell phones in the 80s... "Who needs 'em? Back in my day, we knew the value of talking to a person face to face!"
post #23 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaquekyd View Post

i think its awesome that Google does stuff like this. Like you said, what other company would put money into projects like this that they wont see an immediate return on investment, if not ever, on. They are doing cool things because they are engineers in a position to put capital into their wacky ideas. If ANYTHING good comes from this, its a great thing in my opinon. more power to them.

From a business perspective, this is a terrible use of capital. Does Google plan to become a car company next?

Don't whitewash Google on this. Face it. They're a public corporation. They have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. This means making appropriate business decisions, and this sure isn't an appropriate business decision.
post #24 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Uh, Microsoft bought Surface.



This will be interesting... so who did Microsoft buy Surface off and when did this occur???
post #25 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

You guys sound like the old men who sit on their porches and shake their canes at the "goddarned kids these days" who listen to music with their car windows down and laugh exuberantly when they're talking to friends. You should take a second to consider how many commonplace items that we depend on daily were at some point hopeless R&D money pits. If you went back to 1940 and told someone that you wanted to invent an worldwide network that would allow anyone to find any piece of information available to the public in under thirty seconds they would laugh you out of the room. Or look at cell phones in the 80s... "Who needs 'em? Back in my day, we knew the value of talking to a person face to face!"

You are missing the point. I think futuristic toys should be developed. I just don't think the Google play room is the right place for it to develop. To keep with your World War II era analogy, no I don't think it would have been very helpful for a bunch of succssul 1940s entreprenuers to sit around brainstorming how to make the world wide web. The world wide web was hatched at the right time and the right place from people working on real products that needed another 50 years to develop. There were thousands of tools and discoveries in instrumentation and materials chemistry that were necessary to make the microprocessors necessary for the world wide web to happen. Thinking about it in 1940 would have been a waste of time.

Or what about your example of cell phones in the early 80s. Do you think we would have gotten the iPhone sooner if Steve Jobs would have built a lab in the early 80s to figure out how to make touch screen phones? I think not. He would have wasted 15 years of his life. He wouldn't have had time to create real businesses like NeXT and PIXAR and he wouldn't have been in a position to build the real iPhone. The google boys and their tinker toys are just day dreaming. Its stupid and a waste of shareholder money. There is nothing wrong with day dreaming. Just do it on your own nickle, not the company's revenue.
post #26 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

A tidbit of trivia; the Kinect-like interface seen in Minority Report came from consultation between Spielberg and the Microsoft team.

Unlikely. Minority Report was released to movie theaters in 2002. PrimeSense, the Israeli company that developed Kinect, was founded in 2005.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #27 of 68
Judgement Day - 2036.

The day GoogleNet became self-aware...

post #28 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

You are missing the point. I think futuristic toys should be developed. I just don't think the Google play room is the right place for it to develop. To keep with your World War II era analogy, no I don't think it would have been very helpful for a bunch of succssul 1940s entreprenuers to sit around brainstorming how to make the world wide web. The world wide web was hatched at the right time and the right place from people working on real products that needed another 50 years to develop. There were thousands of tools and discoveries in instrumentation and materials chemistry that were necessary to make the microprocessors necessary for the world wide web to happen. Thinking about it in 1940 would have been a waste of time.

Or what about your example of cell phones in the early 80s. Do you think we would have gotten the iPhone sooner if Steve Jobs would have built a lab in the early 80s to figure out how to make touch screen phones? I think not. He would have wasted 15 years of his life. He wouldn't have had time to create real businesses like NeXT and PIXAR and he wouldn't have been in a position to build the real iPhone. The google boys and their tinker toys are just day dreaming. Its stupid and a waste of shareholder money. There is nothing wrong with day dreaming. Just do it on your own nickle, not the company's revenue.

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't suggesting that someone in the 1940s could develop the internet or that Steve Jobs could have hatched the iPhone in the 80s. All I'm saying is that as time passes, complex technologies find their places in our lives in ways that people couldn't have predicted decades earlier. These technologies take years to get to the point where they can be marketed to consumers, and all that developmental work has to start somewhere. As an example relevant to the article, Google may very well be working on robots that can walk and have a minimal awareness of their environment (check out Honda's ASIMO for reference). But this level of technology would only be the starting point of much more advanced robots that will be able to be fully interactive members of society (to the extent that they are programmed). It's something that takes place one step at a time, and there is no reason to have a stifling attitude towards the R&D money that any company wants to spend on technologies that have no place in life as we currently live it.
post #29 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't suggesting that someone in the 1940s could develop the internet or that Steve Jobs could have hatched the iPhone in the 80s. All I'm saying is that as time passes, complex technologies find their places in our lives in ways that people couldn't have predicted decades earlier. These technologies take years to get to the point where they can be marketed to consumers, and all that developmental work has to start somewhere. As an example relevant to the article, Google may very well be working on robots that can walk and have a minimal awareness of their environment (check out Honda's ASIMO for reference). But this level of technology would only be the starting point of much more advanced robots that will be able to be fully interactive members of society (to the extent that they are programmed). It's something that takes place one step at a time, and there is no reason to have a stifling attitude towards the R&D money that any company wants to spend on technologies that have no place in life as we currently live it.

The idea of a generation of people working on technology independently and then the next generation advancing upon prior research, however fringe, and making it more useful, more practical and advancing the foundation to the next level to the point where it can actually effect our lives is lost amongst a lot of the kneejerk Google haters here....despite the fact that Apple is one such generational leap making company whose products would be impossible without the fringe test workers (trial and error and oddity) to pave the way.
post #30 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaquekyd View Post

i think its awesome that Google does stuff like this. Like you said, what other company would put money into projects like this that they wont see an immediate return on investment, if not ever, on. They are doing cool things because they are engineers in a position to put capital into their wacky ideas. If ANYTHING good comes from this, its a great thing in my opinon. more power to them.

Well since they dont almost pay any taxes they can probably burn some money in a way that probably wont lead to any products...
post #31 of 68
First I'd like to say that I think Apple products slay all others in terms of design, functionality, and beauty. And as far as I can tell it's the greatest company in the world... But I will never badmouth Google for putting effort into all of these futuristic ideas. Only an idiot would try to make Googles scientific curiosity sound negative. iOS vs Android aside, I think that the long term future of technology belongs to both AAPL and GOOG. I wish Google didn't steal from AAPL they way they did, but in the end i think that AAPL and GOOG will be the two companies that really usher in the beautiful future that were all headed for. GOOG just needs to show a little more respect to AAPL and not try to steal and beat them at their own game. If AAPL and GOOG would just work together instead of fight, I think that together they could have us living the kind of futuristic lives that were all destined for in the greatest, smoothest, fastest way. I'm starting to think that iPhone should allow Android the same way Mac allows Windows... What do we have to lose? Nothing! Because eventually the Android user would realiZe iOS is better...
post #32 of 68
X labs? seriously?

The name alone says it all…Geek meets lousy taste in sitcoms
post #33 of 68
According to Isaacson's biography of Jobs, when Apple decided they wanted to get rid of Jobs, one of the first ideas they came up with was to build an off-campus "lab" to research the future and put Jobs in charge of it. The idea would be to get Jobs away from anyone doing real work without incurring the publicity cost of having the founder leave. Obviously Google had the same idea with Sergey Brin (maybe Jobs even suggested it to Larry Page).

The ideas in this article are mostly ridiculous; the kind of stuff the MIT Media Lab was doing in the 90s. The most impressive thing is the self-driving car, which has long been a project at Stanford University, but now has the addition of a Google logo on the side.
post #34 of 68
Are you all a bunch of douche bags here or what? It's great that Google is willing and able to do this research. Fringe research can and does lead to practical applications. Do a search on all the practical applications that have come out of NASA research even though much of it's intended use could be deemed "pie in the sky" nonsense like people here want to consider Google's lab.
post #35 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Are you all a bunch of douche bags here or what? It's great that Google is willing and able to do this research. Fringe research can and does lead to practical applications. Do a search on all the practical applications that have come out of NASA research even though much of it's intended use could be deemed "pie in the sky" nonsense like people here want to consider Google's lab.

They have to hate Google because they believe Jobs was their father and they are carrying out his duties or something like that.

Also Apple exists in a void and can only inspire but can never be inspired.

They also came up with everything on their own...no tech history.
post #36 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Uh, Microsoft bought Surface.

No, Microsoft bought Kinect. Surface was developed in house.

Guess which one was actually popular...
post #37 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Sure, but wouldn't it be even better of Google invested some money in creating something useful? Like making their own OS rather than blindly copying (and stealing) everything in sight?

I don't think the existence of these Google Labs are in ANY WAY constraining Google's ability to make their own OS.

If the money was not spent here, it would be lying around in a bank account somewhere, and not being used elsewhere. Google has a ton of cash sitting around. None of their projects are suffering for a lack of investment.

This, combined with their 20% time, makes Google one of the only American companies that is actually spending time/money on R&D which is focused at more than the immediate term, which is quite commendable.
post #38 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

They have to hate Google because they believe Jobs was their father and they are carrying out his duties or something like that.

Also Apple exists in a void and can only inspire but can never be inspired.

They also came up with everything on their own...no tech history.

Nice Strawman.

If this was indeed the case, how in the world do you explain Coverflow and Siri? 2 products and technologies which were not only bought from 3rd parties, but Apple didn't even bother to change the name of the technology? If Apple's fans indeed did think Apple invented everything on their own, wouldn't Apple put at least the slightest effort to hide the fact that these were products purchased from outside, you know, by at least changing the name?
post #39 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

What a waste.

All the ideas we know about (and those mentioned here as well), are more "pie-in-the-sky" than "shoot-for-the-stars."

You wouldn't see Apple or Microsoft invest a thin dime into something as absolutely ridiculous as a space elevator, or any of the rest of these futurist daydreams.

I wonder how much money was wasted on that Internet connected signalling light bulb alone? Millions probably, and all just to prove that it's possible to transmit data through a regular lightbulb.

Who will install these lightbulbs? Why would anyone transmit data over a lightbulb? We are all supposed to buy these things and then that *one* scenario, when the internet is down, but electric power is still working, we will all turn to our kitchen lightbulbs to get data?

Right. \

Wrong.

The light bulbs will be capable of being remotely controlled by Android devices. Kind of like fancy, expensive home automation packages, but almost the same price as an LED light bulb, with a cheap, mass produced chip built into it.

Brilliant.
post #40 of 68
Yeah, and all the while, millions are dying from cancer

We have millions of hunger people

Homeless people

Pollution

A government that's a wreck

An economy that's just hanging on by a tread

A growing gap between the wealthy and middle class (Hell lower class don't seem to count any more)

War, Hate and so many other issues right here on this planet.

Let's spend a little bit more wisely, and deal with the here and now now if at all possible.

Skip
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › NYT offers a peek inside Google's secret, robot-filled 'X' labs