Google’s Smart Display UI is a peek at Android’s voice-centric Fuchsia evolution

Android will be pretty in pink.

At long last, the first Smart Display for Google Assistant has arrived. A joint effort between Google and Lenovo, it kicks off a new wave of screen-centric smart speakers that look good on a counter, sound good when playing music, and make the Echo Show less good by comparison.

But the best part of the Lenovo Smart Display isn’t the industrial design or 10-inch Full HD display. It’s Google’s interface. Where the Assistant and Alexa interfaces on Android phones and the Echo Show are rudimentary visual representations of our queries, the Smart Display doesn’t just let you see what Google Assistant is thinking—it expands and enhances Assistant’s abilities with an intuitive marriage of touch and voice.

Google’s smart display UI combines the elegance of Material Design with the proficiency of Android and the smarts of Android Things into an OS that feels like the future. And it very well may be. It’s smart, light, and responsive in all the ways Android isn’t, and it gives Google Assistant a real platform for development, one that might be coming to a phone near you.

From Robot green to Assistant pink

One of the tech world’s worst-kept secrets is that there’s a hidden project deep with Google’s labs called Fuchsia that represents the future of Android and Chrome OS. According to numerous reports, the platform has been in development for a number of years, but recent evidence suggests that it’s closer than ever to realization.

 Michael Simon/IDG

In a report earlier this month, Bloomberg News had this to say about Fuchsia: “At the moment, Android, which was developed when phones were just beginning to use touch screens, is also not built to handle the type of voice-enabled apps that Google sees as the future of computing. So Fuchsia is being developed with voice interaction at its core. The design is also more flexible in that it adjusts to multiple screen sizes—an attempt to cater to the new products, such as televisions, cars and refrigerators, where Google is spreading its software.” The key here is flexibility for vastly different screen sizes, something that Android doesn’t really have.

That’s the beauty of Google’s Smart Display OS. While it’s nowhere near as powerful nor versatile as Android, it’s easy to see how it could scale down to a phone with Google Assistant at its core.

As it stands on Android, Google Assistant operates on a separate layer on top of the system, helping you navigate deep menus and apps but basically working as a shortcut to things like Chrome, Settings, and Spotify. On the Smart Display, Assistant is central and vital to the experience, taking you places you can’t get to with your fingers. You can still tap and swipe the screen, but Assistant runs the show, popping up when you need it and displaying exactly the information you asked for. You might be able to get the same information by queuing Assistant on your phone, but on the Smart Display there’s a tight level of integration with the whole system that gives Google’s AI a starring role.

 Michael Simon/IDG

I used this example in my review, but I’ll repeat it here: When you ask, “Hey Google, what’s an allosaurus?” it will tell you that it’s a dinosaur that lived 150 million years ago just like on your phone. The Smart Assistant takes it further from that point, showing a picture, breaking out additional facts such as the dinosaur’s estimated land speed, and offer a series of links for deeper exploration. It’s all done on the fly, pulling info from Wikipedia, photos from Google Images, and deciding what’s relevant and relative. It’s one of the smartest interfaces I’ve ever seen, and it sure seems like a precursor to the kind of smart thinking we’re going to get in Fuchsia.

Seeing is believing

Because no one wants to talk to their device all the time, Google’s Smart Display interface is just as good with the microphone off. Swipe to the left, and you’ll get a series of cards spotlighting the things your can do: music, videos, recipes, etc. It’s very device-specific, but it’s also a foundation for a future unified system that scales across a number of devices and relies less heavily on traditional apps.

We’re already seeing a change in how apps are presented, with Android P’s horizontal card system and gesture-based navigation. The Smart DIsplay’s interface lets you switch among and interact with apps using a slider that’s similar to Apple’s home indicator. Android P is less about opening and closing apps as it is about promoting them to the system level, where we can interact with them without needing a full launch.

 Michael Simon/IDG

That’s wildly different than Android as we know it, but it makes sense. If voice is going to take on a bigger role within the system, there needs to be less of a traditional home screen and a greater reliance on Google Assistant as the main navigator. That’s how it works on the Smart Display, where you rarely need to go “back home.” Once you’re done with your query, just walk away, let the home screen (or lock screen in Android parlance) appear, and the whole system resets. It’s faster, lighter, and more intuitive than any system that runs on a mobile phone.

If and when it’s ever released, Fuchsia probably won’t look at all like the OS on the Smart Display. Still, what we see on Lenovo’s new device could be the start of a whole new world for Google, not just for Assistant but for Android, Chrome, Wear OS, and pretty much everything else that runs on a screen. And I can’t wait to get my hands… er, voice on it.

23andMe Is Sharing Genetic Data with Drug Giant

The genetics testing company and GlaxoSmithKline are using 5 million people’s data to develop medical treatment

Popular genetics-testing company 23andMe is partnering with drug giant GlaxoSmithKline to use people’s DNA to develop medical treatments, the company announced in a blog post yesterday (July 25).

During the four-year collaboration, the London-based GlaxoSmithKline will use 23andMe’s genetic database to zero in on possible targets and treatments for human disease.

“The goal of the collaboration is to gather insights and discover novel drug targets driving disease progression and develop therapies,” GlaxoSmithKline said in yesterday’s statement, where it also reported it was investing $300 million in 23andMe. [How Do DNA Ancestry Tests Really Work?]

It’s not yet clear which conditions will be investigated during the collaboration, but one example showed how the collaboration might work: the two companies’ previous collaboration on the gene LRRK2, which is linked to some cases of Parkinson’s disease, Forbes reported.

Only about 10,000 of the 1 million Americans with Parkinson’s disease have the disease because of LRRK2. So, GlaxoSmithKline has to test about 100 Parkinson’s patients to find just one potential candidate. However, 23andMe has already provided 250 Parkinson’s patients who have agreed to be re-contacted for GlaxoSmithKline’s clinical trials, which may help the pharmaceutical company develop the drug much faster, Forbes reported.

However, not everybody is on board with 23andMe’s new partnership. If a person’s DNA is used in research, that person should be compensated, said Peter Pitts, president of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest.

“Are they going to offer rebates to people who opt in, so their customers aren’t paying for the privilege of 23andMe working with a for-profit company in a for-profit research project?” Pitts said to NBC.

In addition, even though 23andMe gets the consent of its customers to use their genetic data, it’s unlikley that most people are aware of this.

“The problem with a lot of these privacy policies and Terms of Service is that no one really reads them,” Tiffany C. Li, a privacy expert and resident fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project, told Tom’s Guide, a Live Science sister site. “You are paying to help the company make money with your data.”

The new collaboration isn’t the first time 23andMe’s vast pool of genetic data has been mined by scientists. The San Francisco startup has already published more than 100 scientific papers based on its customers’ data, according to yesterday’s blog post, by Anne Wojcicki, 23andMe’s co-founder and chief executive. In 2015, the company launched 23andMe Therapeutics, which focuses on developing “novel treatments and cures based on genetic insights from the consented 23andMe community,” Wojcicki wrote.

23andMe has more than 5 million customers worldwide who have had their DNA analyzed for ancestral data. People who would like to close their 23andMe accounts can go here, but the company notes that “any research involving your data that has already been performed or published prior to our receipt of your request will not be reversed, undone, or withdrawn.”

However, once a 23andMe account is closed, any spit samples that a person initially gave consent to be stored “will be discarded,” the company said.

THE $4 Z80 SINGLE-BOARD COMPUTER, EVOLVED.

Chrome, Firefox rein in memory-hogging websites

Because even 16GB of RAM can feel cramped on a laptop these days.

Good news: Mozilla’s Firefox and Google’s Chrome are working to reduce the amount of memory and other resources their browsers use.

You might have noticed that browsers impose an increasingly onerous burden on your phone or laptop. Websites are getting bigger and browsers are getting features that make them more like full-fledged operating systems than mere document viewers.

One example, this Google Doc I’m typing in right now is using 218MB of my memory. No wonder even 16GB of memory on a laptop a starting to feel cramped.

So what is changing? Chrome 68, which arrived a few days ago, adds a new feature called the Page Lifecycle interface that will let the browser more gracefully pause websites that aren’t active and reconstitute them when you need them again. “It allows browsers to more aggressively optimize system resources, ultimately benefiting all web users,” said Chrome programmer Philip Walton.

And Firefox has a project called Fission MemShrink designed to shave 7MB off of each of potentially a hundred or more computing processes the browser uses to draw a website on your screen. It’s part of the broader high-profile Fission program to give websites a snappier response in the browser.

Computer memory, processing power and data storage space have been a scarce resources since the birth of the industry. So every little step to liberate them is important. For one thing, it lets you run more apps or get more performance out of an important one. For another, it can mean your personal computer, tablet or phone doesn’t use as much battery power.

Fission Memshrink is designed to reduce memory usage, but it might be a wash since Firefox will use more processes. But those processes deliver performance and security improvements that otherwise would gobble up more memory, so it’s not unfair to see the glass as half full here.

“Project Fission … will result in more responsiveness. We also expect security benefits from more isolation of different web content,” Mozilla said in a statement.

Page Lifecycle adopts a strategy from mobile phones, whose underlying operating systems are aggressive about clamping down on apps to preserve resources and protect battery life. If an app isn’t being actively used, it might be paused for the good of the system.

But Page Lifecycle won’t mean an instant fix. For it to work best, web developers will need to support it so browsers can work better to dial resources up or down.

Page Lifecycle will apply also to progressive web apps (PWAs), which look more like native apps on smartphones but run atop a browser foundation. That should mean better integration with mobile phones and better performance.

“PWAs can use the new page lifecycle APIs [application programming interfaces] to store state and rehydrate like native apps,” tweeted Alex Russell, a senior Chrome programmer. “Exciting!”

Worms Frozen for 42,000 Years in Siberian Permafrost Wriggle to Life

Is Sleeping with a Fan On Actually Bad for Your Health?

Scorching summer days can be tough without air conditioning, and you might find yourself searching for ways to stay cool, including using a fan at night. But is it healthy to sleep with a fan on?

Some recent headlines have made sleeping with a fan on sound downright dangerous. “Why Sleeping with Your Fan on Could Be Seriously Damaging Your Health,” read one recent headline from the Mirror. “Sleeping with a Bedside Fan Could Pose Health Risks,” read another, from LifeZette.

But experts say the reality is not that dire.

“There’s nothing about a fan that’s toxic,” said Dr. Len Horovitz, a pulmonologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. “There’s nothing wrong with circulating air.” [7 Common Summer Health Concerns]

Indeed, sleep is very important, and you don’t want to be sweating all night, Horovitz told Live Science.

But anything that causes rapid air movement, including a fan, can evaporate moisture from your mouth and nasal passages, drying them out, he said. Fans may also circulate dust, which could bother people, particularly if they have allergies.

If you do sleep with a fan on, Horovitz said it’s a good idea to keep it at a safe distance from your bed and not have it blowing right on you. To guard against dust and other allergens, Horovitz recommended keeping an air filter in the bedroom. He also recommended performing daily sinus irrigation with saline, which can help with dry nasal passages, congestion and other nasal problems.

Cold air can also cause muscle contractions, and so exposure to this air at night may lead to a stiff neck in the morning. But Horovitz said this is more of a problem with air conditioning that’s left on at night than it is with fans. If you do sleep with air conditioning on at night, Horovitz said the air shouldn’t be blowing directly on you and the setting shouldn’t be lower than 68 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius).

Original article on Live Science.

Steven Pinker, Author of Bill Gates’s Favorite Book, Says Entrepreneurs Should Trust Stats, Not Their Intuition

Image credit: Brad Barket | Getty Images

Lydia Belanger

ENTREPRENEUR STAFF

Associate Editor

July 26 7 min read

Steven Pinker is the author of several books, including Enlightenment Now, which published earlier this year and immediately became Bill Gates’s “new favorite book of all time.”

The thesis of Pinker’s book ultimately boils down to, that while you might think that the world is doomed — considering the news we read and see — if you measure health, wealth, safety, knowledge and quality of life generally, humanity overall is better off than ever.

“For all the flaws in human nature,” Pinker writes, “it contains the seeds of its own improvement, as long as it comes up with norms and institutions that channel parochial interests into universal benefits.”

In other words, humans have cooperated and worked toward the common good to survive and thrive thus far, and we must continue to keep collective best interests in mind, Pinker asserts. He explains that, given our track record, he has no reason to believe we won’t.

That’s despite recent political developments that suggest polarization in nations such as the U.S. and the U.K., business and environmental deregulation set in motion by the Trump Administration, a widening wealth gap and other trends that might indicate otherwise.

Pinker encourages taking a broader view: Things are better in the aggregate, he argues. Similarly, we should avoid letting our own biases cloud the best interests of everyone or even how we should proceed to further better the world. He uses the word “should” often. As with the excerpt above, his arguments are contingent on humans deciding to work together for universal improvement.

Pinker spoke with Entrepreneur at OZY Fest in New York City this past weekend about capitalism, the complementary and potentially evolving roles of businesses and governments and how entrepreneurs should approach problem-solving.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

How can companies reconcile the need to compete and focus on the bottom line with focusing on a common goal toward the betterment of the world?

Latest Articles

This Is Why You Need to Build a 7-Figure Business

How to Boost Your Confidence, Even When You’re the Only Woman in the Room

If Your Sales Pitch Is Missing This Step, You May Miss Out on the Sale

5 Things You Need to Know Before Opening a Dispensary

It’s Not About Disruption — Industry Transformation Is About New Markets

It’s not unlike what individuals face. It’s always reasonable for a person to pursue his or her own interests, but not at the cost of being a sociopath and harming other people, but within a framework of laws and norms that benefit everyone, if everyone follows them.

So, in competing, which is a good thing, businesses should not throw out their consciences, which is a bad thing, and should not oppose fair rules for everyone and fair laws for everyone within a society that makes the competition work toward the good of all.

Can you describe an example?

With regulations such as environmental protections, a given company may fear that if they pollute less than their competitors, they’ll be at a disadvantage, whereas, if everyone were subject to the same regulations, then no one would have a competitive advantage.

And likewise, in an environment that is ruthlessly competitive, you might be driven out of business if you don’t pollute and your competitors save the money of putting in pollution-control devices. But clearly, it’s an irrational country as a whole that would permit that to happen.

In sports, everyone benefits if there’s a rule that you have to wear a helmet. If wearing a helmet were optional, you wouldn’t want to hurt the competitive advantage of your team and might be willing to take a greater chance of brain damage or even death. So, making it voluntary in a competitive environment is not viable, but if everyone has to wear a helmet, then you can still have an exciting and competitive game without the brain damage or early death.

Businesses sometimes step up and try to take over roles that government has traditionally played. For example, Amazon is getting into the health space with Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan. What do you think of developments like this?

We have to be open-minded. It wasn’t stated at the beginning of time by divine decree that government was the best provider of healthcare, but nor is General Motors or Google, necessarily, the best provider. We have to use our collective intelligence and be guided by evidence from experiments to see what works and what doesn’t.

Whether you’re on the left and therefore believe that the government should handle all functions, or the right and believe that private businesses should handle all functions, clearly there’s got to be a tradeoff and a division of labor. And that division may itself change over time, with changes in technology and demographics.

What initiative lead by the private sector or entrepreneurs right now is a force for positive change in society?

There is a movement called “conscientious capitalism” to try to attain the benefits of the market economy and the creativity and entrepreneurship and distributed knowledge that comes from capitalism — while addressing that the fact that the reputation of capitalism is in tatters, especially among younger people, it’s considered a dirty word.

When you have companies that engage in certain destructive practices, like buying politicians, lobbying for changes in the law that benefit them individually, engage in deceptive practices or pollution, it tarnishes the entire concept of capitalism and poisons whole sectors of the population against it. And given the benefits that capitalism can have — at least, capitalism with socially conscientious norms and judicious regulation — that is a tragedy for everyone.

Some people on the left say “conscientious capitalism” is an oxymoron.

It really should not be, especially since we know the alternative, which is, economies that are controlled or commanded by governments are both less efficient and less humane.

How can entrepreneurs determine that they’re solving the right problems?

Government plays a role in setting incentives so that entrepreneurs will put their creative energies into technologies and businesses that will serve us best in the future. An example being, carbon pricing. How are you going to invest in low-carbon energy, in solar, in fourth-generation nuclear, in battery technology, in carbon capture and storage? Well, economically, it may not be a good bet right now, if there’s an unlimited supply of cheap petroleum. Without government pricing carbon, which only the government can do, then, economically, it may not pay to invest in low-carbon energy.

Choosing a problem to solve is not itself a technological issue, but a moral and political one — namely, what is it that we ought to be trying to do? If the problem is simply maximizing shareholder value over the next quarter, that could lead to different decisions than if it were to provide the world with low-carbon energy or to extend human life spans or to expand education.

We certainly have to be conscious of our limitations as forecasters and decision-makers. There’s a human tendency to overestimate our own ability to see the future, to trust charismatic authorities, to trust our intuition. Sixty years of research in psychology shows that can be outperformed in prediction by very simple mathematical formulas. We’re far too confident in our own intuitions.

How do we combat that?

There are many people in business who are overly influenced by anecdotes, who are overconfident in their intuition. It’s often hard to distinguish correlation and causation, but using a bit of statistical thinking that can go a long way. This suggests that there’s probably a big untapped potential for people in business if they were to step back from their own intuition and to think a little bit more scientifically, a little bit more critically, a little bit more quantitatively, could take advantage of huge opportunities in escaping from their own biases.

Americans are okay with gene-editing embryos to create healthier babies