technology

WTF Fun Fact 13513 – Apple Mouse Prototype

Innovation often comes from the most unexpected places–like a roll-on deodorant. Believe it or nor, the first Apple mouse prototype involved a deodorant ball.

Setting the Scene

The early 1980s was a transformative era for personal computing. The market was teeming with potential, and Steve Jobs, Apple’s visionary co-founder, recognized the importance of a user-friendly interface.

While visiting Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), Jobs was introduced to the concept of a graphical user interface and a device to navigate it: the mouse.

Enchanted by its potential, Jobs sought to integrate this technology into Apple’s computers. However, the existing design was clunky, costly, and far from the elegant solution Apple desired.

Birth of the Apple Mouse

Jobs handed the task of redesigning the mouse to Dean Hovey, a co-founder of the design firm IDEO. The challenge was clear: create a more efficient, durable, and above all, affordable mouse for the masses.

Hovey, in his endeavor to revolutionize the mouse’s design, found inspiration in an unlikely source: a deodorant stick. By taking apart a roll-on deodorant, Hovey observed that the ball could roll smoothly in any direction. This ball mechanism, he realized, could be the solution to creating a mouse that was both precise and cost-effective.

From Prototype to Product

Utilizing the deodorant ball, the team developed a prototype that was simpler and more efficient than its predecessors. It was an embodiment of Apple’s design philosophy — taking complex ideas and making them accessible and intuitive for the user.

But why was the deodorant ball so transformative? The key lay in its omnidirectional capability. Previous mouse designs often used wheels, limiting movement to two axes: horizontal and vertical.

The deodorant ball’s ability to roll freely in all directions allowed for more fluid and accurate on-screen movements, a feature that would become fundamental to the mouse’s operation.

Impact of the Apple Mouse

The Apple mouse, with its deodorant-inspired design, debuted in 1983 with the Apple Lisa computer, and a year later, with the iconic Apple Macintosh. Its release marked a paradigm shift in human-computer interaction, paving the way for the mouse to become an essential accessory for personal computers worldwide.

Though the internal mechanics of mice have evolved over the years, with laser and optical technologies replacing the ball mechanism, the foundational concept remains largely unchanged. The success of the Apple mouse laid the groundwork for future innovations in interface devices, from trackpads to touch screens.

Today, as we swipe, tap, and click our way through digital landscapes, it’s worth reflecting on the humble origins of the tools we often take for granted. The next time you roll on your deodorant, remember: it’s not just a daily ritual but a nod to a piece of technological history that helped shape the digital age.

— WTF fun facts

Source: “How the Guy Who Designed 1 of Apple’s Most Iconic Products Organizes His Office” — Inc.

WTF Fun Fact 13405 – Robot Pizza Maker

A robot pizza delivery startup that raised nearly half a billion dollars has closed due to technological setbacks. The company, Zume, Inc., had been working on developing a mobile pizza-making machine for years.

There’s big money in future pizza

The failure is surprising, considering the substantial amount of investment capital it received. But this helps highlight the ongoing challenges faced by practical robotics ventures.

One of the key hurdles faced by the robot pizza startup was the difficulty of building a reliable mechanical pizzaiolo. The company struggled for years to prevent melting cheese from sliding off the pizzas while they were being baked in their moving trucks. But this posed too significant of an obstacle. The cheese won.

Does robot pizza have a future?

Interestingly, the robot pizza industry is larger than one might assume. There are several Silicon Valley companies working on automating the pizza-making process. For instance, Stellar Pizza, founded by former SpaceX engineers, is developing a robot capable of making dough, rolling it out, applying various toppings, and baking the pizza.

However, the ambitions of these companies are not focused on recreating the experience of a traditional Italian pizza fresh out of the oven. Instead, they aim to compete with established pizza chains like Domino’s, targeting a more mass-market audience.

Cheesy obstacles

The shutdown of Zume Inc. serves as a cautionary tale in the world of venture investing – and of pizza. Even with significant funding and promising technological ideas, execution and overcoming practical challenges remain critical. This robot pizza startup emphasizes the challenges of trying to merge robotics and culinary endeavors and the difficulties inherent in translating innovative concepts into viable and successful businesses.

Zume Inc. has reportedly engaged the services of Sherwood Partners, a restructuring firm, to facilitate the sale of its assets. The company’s decision to wind down its operations reflects the reality of its financial situation and the inability to sustain its business model in a competitive market.

In the meantime, we’ll just have to appreciate the world’s pizza-makers even more. At least they can keep the cheese in place!

— WTF fun facts

Source: “Robot Pizza Startup Shuts Down After Cheese Kept Sliding Off” — Futurism

WTF Fun Fact 13353 – New Deepfake Research

New deepfake research is attempting to resurrect victims of crime for the common good. Of course, like all deepfakes, this too raises ethical concerns.

How new deepfake research brings people “back from the dead”

Deepfakes are a technology that uses artificial intelligence to create hyper-realistic images and videos of people. But so far, they’ve largely been misused to spread misinformation.

Now, researchers at the University of Florida and the University of Michigan are now exploring the possibility of using deepfake resurrections to promote the public good.

Their study focuses on “deepfake resurrections.” This refers to bringing deceased individuals virtually “back to life” using AI-generated images and videos. The researchers emphasize that their approach is different from controversial cases of deepfake resurrections, such as the ones used for political manipulation or commercial purposes. Instead, they aim to explore scenarios where deepfake resurrections could have a positive impact on society.

Can this technology be used for good?

The researchers conducted a study involving approximately 2,000 participants to explore the potential applications of deepfake resurrections. In this study, they focused on creating deepfake resurrections of victims of drunk driving and domestic violence. The aim was to examine the reactions of the participants and assess whether such resurrections could effectively raise awareness about these pressing social issues.

By using deepfake resurrections to share the stories of these victims, the researchers sought to humanize the issues and evoke empathy in the audience.

However, the PSA had little effect and a more negative than positive reaction. The researchers chalked this up to the lack of trust in deepfakes overall, noting that this affected the effectiveness of deepfake resurrections in raising awareness about social issues.

Ethical considerations

The exploration of deepfake resurrections for the public good raises several ethical questions. One major concern is consent. Since the deceased cannot provide consent, the researchers suggest obtaining permission from the deceased’s estate or family members. This would require creating guidelines to ensure that deepfake resurrections are used in a manner that respects the individual’s legacy and values.

Another ethical consideration is the potential emotional impact on the deceased’s loved ones. While some may find comfort in deepfake resurrections, others might perceive it as a disturbing or disrespectful act. To address this concern, researchers propose involving mental health professionals in the development of deepfake resurrections to ensure they are created with sensitivity and empathy.

Lastly, there is the question of authenticity. The researchers acknowledge the potential for deepfake resurrections to spread misinformation or perpetuate false narratives. To mitigate this risk, they suggest that deepfake resurrections should be transparently labeled as such and accompanied by disclaimers.

— WTF fun facts

Source: “Dying To Tell You: “Deepfake Resurrections” To Promote Public Good Explored By Researchers” — IFL Science

WTF Fun Fact 13249 – ChatGPT Consequences for Creatives

ChatGPT is just a generative language model – a very fancy form of autocorrect, in some cases. And it doesn’t give answers that indicate it’s out to replace human writers. But we don’t yet know what the ChatGPT consequences for creatives are – and neither does the AI. When asked, ChatGPT spat out this answer:

“While AI-generated content may be able to produce work that is similar in style and content to that produced by humans, it is not a replacement for human creativity. There will always be a demand for unique and original human-generated content, and AI-generated content is unlikely to completely replace the work of human writers.”

The word unlikely is a bit eye-opening, but a machine can’t predict how humans may misuse it to replace other humans.

What are some of the possible consequences of ChatGPT for creatives?

ChatGPT is already impacting writers’ ability to make a living. And because it’s not a very good writer, it’s affecting people’s access to good writing.

ChatGPT produces the following argument in favor of itself:

“..there is potential for generative AI to be used in collaboration with human writers, rather than as a replacement. For example, an AI language model could be used to suggest ideas, provide inspiration, or even generate a first draft of a piece of writing, which could then be refined and edited by a human writer.”

It “suggests” that humans will learn to work around it and develop new business models to make room for everyone. Of course, it is quite frequently wrong about things.

“The toasters look like us now”

Plenty of writers are having fun with ChatGPT, however. They’ve never written articles with its help while citing it as a resource. What a way to add to your word count!

And when pressed a bit on its ability to replace humans, it recites the same old line about the potential for collaboration before producing the following paragraph:

“Overall, it is important to approach the development of AI in creative fields with caution and a recognition of the potential risks and benefits. While AI has the potential to transform the creative process in many ways, it is important to find ways to ensure that it does not have a negative impact on the livelihoods of human artists and writers.”

Of course, that last part is up to humans. — WTF fun facts

Source: “ChatGPT isn’t putting me out of a job yet, but it’s very good fun” — TechCrunch (paywalled, sadly)

WTF Fun Fact 13215 – The First Smartwatch

Credit for the first smartwatch concept doesn’t go to Apple. Long before the Apple Watch, Microsoft and Fossil introduced the first standalone smartwatch.

If you want to get more technical, you could claim that the 1982 Seiko TV watch was more similar to the first smartwatch. But it needed an adapter and a large receiver box. And it only showed grainy greyscale TV images.

Another watch that paved the way for the Apple Watch and modern smartwatches was the 1998 Linux Wristwatch, created by Steve Mann and launched by IBM. According to the fact sheet, it was “Designed to communicate wirelessly with PCs, cell phones and other wireless-enabled devices, the ‘smart watch’ will have the ability to view condensed email messages and directly receive pager-like messages.”

What’s the story behind the first smartwatch?

In 2004, Microsoft released its “Smart Personal Object Technology” (SPOT). This allowed users to access services such as news, weather, and stock information from their wristwatches. It was more personalized and independent of other technology than previous “smart” watches.

Microsoft’s Smartwatch quickly became a hit among tech enthusiasts and professionals alike. The device was packed with advanced features, allowing users to stay connected while on the go. It had a wide array of sensors, allowing it to monitor heart rate, steps taken, and other important health metrics.

Furthermore, it was one of the first smartwatches to feature a touchscreen display, making it easier to interact with apps.

Microsoft and Fossil actually collaborated on the first smartwatch. The Microsoft SPOT Watch had a monochrome 90×126 pixel screen and was accessible through a yearly subscription that cost from $39 to $59. The watches featured customizable watch face displays and were built on a new technology platform designed to improve the functionality and usefulness of everyday objects.

Not long after, watchmakers Citizen, Fossil, and Suunto all joined the project to create the first smartwatches.

What happened to Microsoft’s smart watch?

The device was well-received by users, who praised its versatile design and advanced features. It was also praised for its long battery life, which allowed users to stay connected for extended periods of time.

The Microsoft smartwatch was also quite easy to use thanks to an intuitive interface that made it simple to navigate.

Despite its success, the device was not a commercial success and was eventually discontinued in 2010. This was primarily due to the fact that it was too expensive for the average consumer and was unable to compete with the lower-priced rivals that had entered the market.

However, the device paved the way for the smartwatches that we have today. — WTF fun facts

Source: “Smartwatch timeline: The devices that paved the way for the Apple Watch” — Wearable

WTF Fun Fact 12409 – A Strong Signal Jammer

Signal jammers are often illegal for a reason – they can take out all communications in an area, including the ability to dial 911. But a French father in the town of Messanges, France, clearly didn’t know that. He was just trying to get his social media-addicted kids off the internet between midnight and 3 am so they would get some sleep.

A report from the outlet France Bleu says the dad used a multi-wave band jammer, seemingly without knowing its power. These are illegal in France (as well as the U.S.). They work by interfering with all communication signals, not just the internet. Authoritarian regimes often use them to stop the spread of information during revolts.

It wasn’t until neighbors started complaining that the government was forced to investigate the reason for the broader power outage and questioned the father. According to French authorities:

“He was thinking of depriving only his children of the internet and did not imagine that the wave jammer he was using would disrupt telecommunications in an area spanning two municipalities. An investigation by the National Frequency Agency established his responsibility and legal proceedings were initiated.”

You read that correct – legal proceedings. It’s a pretty big deal (and could have had dangerous consequences) to strip your neighbors, even accidentally, of the ability to communicate with the outside world.

That’s why dad is now facing a fine of 30,000 Euros and six months in jail. – WTF Fun Facts

Source: A Father Accidentally Shut Down His Town’s Whole Internet in an Effort to Limit His Kids’ Screentime — Gizmodo