Cheeseburger Gothic

Ashley Madison was selling a fantasy of infidelity

Posted August 27, 2015 into Science and Tech by John Birmingham

I have to admit I've been agog at this whole story. I even flagged it a month ago in my Saturday coulmn, before it had really broken out into the mainstream. (My punishment, as always, was to be ignored).

This latest analysis is amongst the most intriguiging yet. 35M+ subscribers. Almost none of them women, and the few women they did have were apparently made up.

From Gizmodo:

...the world of Ashley Madison was a far more dystopian place than anyone had realized. This isn’t a debauched wonderland of men cheating on their wives. It isn’t even a sadscape of 31 million men competing to attract those 5.5 million women in the database. Instead, it’s like a science fictional future where every woman on Earth is dead, and some Dilbert-like engineer has replaced them with badly-designed robots.

Those millions of Ashley Madison men were paying to hook up with women who appeared to have created profiles and then simply disappeared. Were they cobbled together by bots and bored admins, or just user debris? Whatever the answer, the more I examined those 5.5 million female profiles, the more obvious it became that none of them had ever talked to men on the site, or even used the site at all after creating a profile. Actually, scratch that. As I’ll explain below, there’s a good chance that about 12,000 of the profiles out of millions belonged to actual, real women who were active users of Ashley Madison.

When you look at the evidence, it’s hard to deny that the overwhelming majority of men using Ashley Madison weren’t having affairs. They were paying for a fantasy.

20 Responses to ‘Ashley Madison was selling a fantasy of infidelity’

DarrenBloomfield mutters...

Posted August 27, 2015
My spouse laughed and laughed when she saw the data. After asking me if I was registered of course...
One of the great big data books of recent times was 'dataclysm' by one of the founders of OkCupid (?) he used a lot of that websites data in support of the arguments in the book. After reading Gizmodo, maybe his data are bunk??

Aw Heck would have you know...

Posted August 27, 2015
Never been on Ashley Madison, but I was on OKC for a year and the guys there were the real deal. I'm marrying one of them in a month's time.

I could lecture for an hour on the different dating sites but it comes down to this: the more 'hook-up' the site is, the less legit the female profiles are.

Respond to this thread

Blarkon swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted August 27, 2015
At some point some bright spark will set up some AIs to string people along on these sites.

Paul_Nicholas_Boylan ducks in to say...

Posted August 27, 2015
I think it has happened and is happening.

Barnesm swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted August 27, 2015
I'll start getting worried when the AIs start trying to hook up with other AIs on these sites.

Sudragon mumbles...

Posted August 28, 2015
Exactly. Skynet wouldn't have caused all that death and destruction if it was getting some love and attention...

NBlob would have you know...

Posted August 28, 2015
Is the Turing test invalidated when one party has a hand down his pants?

damian mumbles...

Posted August 28, 2015
Sex-chatbots? It's hard to prove a negative, but I'd be stunned if they haven't been around for years. Decades. At least one of the first 10 people to "play with" ELIZA in the 60s will have tested some of the parameters. And then the extra data files would have made, swapped and more beer would be smuggled into the lab with all the LISP machines.

Respond to this thread

Dave W would have you know...

Posted August 27, 2015
Jeezus. Just plug a cable into the back of their heads and they could have a Matrix affair.

Paul_Nicholas_Boylan has opinions thus...

Posted August 29, 2015
Wouldn't that be wonderful?

Respond to this thread

w from brisbane mumbles...

Posted August 27, 2015
Next you'll be saying that Ashley Madison isn't a real woman!

Respond to this comment

Rob mutters...

Posted August 27, 2015


why don't people go to bars and pubs to meet other people? Its not that difficult. Get drunk, get talking and don't be a dick.

What I hope is that the sites I use are secure, like amazon, eBay and Google. We know apple isn't, because of what fappened a few months back. .

Idin Doit puts forth...

Posted August 28, 2015
It sounded so possible until your third point.

Respond to this thread

Therbs is gonna tell you...

Posted August 27, 2015
Pubs are always the answer.

Barnesm ducks in to say...

Posted August 27, 2015
or Lube.

damian asserts...

Posted August 27, 2015
And the Word is the Law. Therefore Grease is the Law.

Respond to this thread

Timmo has opinions thus...

Posted August 27, 2015
Wow...! I mean you kind of expect those kind of sites to be a sausage-fest, but those stats just tell an incredibly sad tale.

Paul_Nicholas_Boylan mumbles...

Posted August 29, 2015
Look at the bright side. None of those 31 million blokes are procreating.

NBlob mutters...

Posted August 29, 2015
what makes you think that AM was their only, er, output?

Respond to this thread

Respond to 'Ashley Madison was selling a fantasy of infidelity'

The first Apple Watch explanation that made sense to me. (Including Apple's).

Posted August 17, 2015 into Science and Tech by John Birmingham

I've worn my watch every day since buying it, even returning to the house on the two occassions I forgot to put it on after a shower. I feel like part of me is missing without it. (Or maybe just that I'm missing my calorie count in the fitness tracker).

I still can't explain the thing to anybody who asks though. There is no killer funcrtion. You really don't need this shiny bauble.

But that's why I liked Benedict Evans post, "How is the Apple Watch doing?"

I think he nails it, and his argument applies equally to any smart watch on any platform.

The Apple Watch tries to be beautiful and it tries to be useful. It tries to bridge two worlds - to be a beautiful tech product and a useful luxury product. But really, it's the iPhone or Macbook that are beautiful tech products - the watch is a useful luxury (though one that starts at a lower price than any previous Apple product). Being able to see the next turn on your route as you walk along a crowed street on your wrist instead of pulling out (and dropping) your phone is not necessary and you don't need it - it's a luxury.

But luxuries are good. If we only bought things that we need, and that have clear use cases, then we'd all wear nothing but overalls and have a single bare lightbulb in each room of our homes.

5 Responses to ‘The first Apple Watch explanation that made sense to me. (Including Apple's).’

Rob swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted August 17, 2015

I really like the casio Gshock watches, but i just can't for the life of me can't actually operate the damn thing. But I totally agree with the luxury thing. I bought my pricey watch because I could afford one and at $400 dollars I can show off a chunk of chrome and silver and it shows I have money every where I go. In a world where you can buy a $100 surround sound system that basically sounds like the $2000 yamaha version I have, or where a $500 PC rig works as well as a $3K one , or you get a loan you cannot afford to buy a car you don't need. You need something to seperate you from the bogans in the burbs. But I don't think I will go a smart watch, I really only use my phone for texting my family and updating social media, the handy features would be lost on this office schlub.

Respond to this comment

Barnesm puts forth...

Posted August 17, 2015

Interesting piece, and the aesthetically beautiful combined with functional is at the heart of many of these more recent trends, and the whole Raison d'être of the steampunk design ethic.

I do like the idea that its removes a 'friction' from daily life, a small inconvenience. I would only add it does this without introducing a greater inconvenience, such as having to charge it every two hours, a daily use seems to be the ideal battery life for this item.

Not sure about the 'Confusion is the mark of a transformative product' its also the sign of a shit product as well. While its true its not a good standard.

Respond to this comment

w from brisbane reckons...

Posted August 17, 2015
Benedict highlights the mixed blessing of access to luxuries. Because, I've got to say, I find a woman in overalls pretty darned sexy.

NBlob asserts...

Posted August 17, 2015
W, your 80's are showing.

Respond to this thread

ChrisB swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted August 17, 2015
You know what my iWatchAppleThingee looks like? It has a faded olive-green strap, white numbers (that glow) on a black background. The glass is 1/4 thick and was state-of-the-art when it was issued to my grandfather in 1942.
It went from Georgia, to NYC, crossed the Atlantic, hung out in England for a few months, then hit Omaha Beach. France. Switzerland. Belgium. And into Germany...and I wouldn't trade it for two iThingees.

Respond to this comment

Respond to 'The first Apple Watch explanation that made sense to me. (Including Apple's).'

Not the NASA news

Posted July 24, 2015 into Science and Tech by John Birmingham

I’m a bit disappointed by NASA’s ‘huge’ news of a new ‘Earth-like’ planet discovered around a sun-like star. They’ve been teasing this all week and I was really expecting something like a new rocky planet in the habitable zone with a confirmed nitrogen/oxygen atmosphere.
Two out of three doesn’t rate a cigar.
The new planet is indeed rocky. It orbits a sun very much like our own and it does so at a distance you could hope to find liquid water. All necessary preconditions for life. Necessary but not sufficient.
Can’t believe I almost got up early to check my news feeds for this.

13 Responses to ‘Not the NASA news’

Blarkon would have you know...

Posted July 24, 2015
The problem with Exoplanets is that all the good ones have been taken by the Space Sharks. Even space lizards don't fuck with Space Sharks.

John Birmingham swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted July 24, 2015
Pfft. Space sharks. We've got Mick Fanning, mate. All the space shark planets are belong to us now.

Respond to this thread

TheWah ducks in to say...

Posted July 24, 2015
It's bigger than us and 1.5 billion years older than us. Its star has an extra 10% on our Star. If it had water once it probably would have boiled away by now.
I agree, John, underwhelming news.. and I'm all about space stuff

Respond to this comment

John Birmingham asserts...

Posted July 24, 2015
Sorted.

Respond to this thread

Barnesm mutters...

Posted July 24, 2015
Well they had intended to announce that all the chimps they sent into space came back hyper-intelligent, but we all know how that went.

insomniac puts forth...

Posted July 24, 2015
For all we know we could be the apes just waiting for a super evolved Charleston Heston to return.

Shifty Tourist reckons...

Posted July 24, 2015
that twist would still make more sense that Mark Wahlberg landing in front of a statue of Ape-raham Lincoln.

Respond to this thread

Shifty Tourist is gonna tell you...

Posted July 24, 2015

It reminds me of a big announcement they made a few years back. I'm paraphrasing of course, but the tone was something like this.

NASA CONFIRMS BASED SILICON LIFE EXISTS*+

*potentially

+in a lab


I can't blame them.... if the biggest thing you've ever done is land on the freaking moon, everything you achieve after that is going to be a bit of a let down.

Shifty Tourist has opinions thus...

Posted July 24, 2015
silicon based, I mean

Respond to this thread

damian swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted July 24, 2015
Sun sized star, Earth sized planet with moon sized moon - then it's time to get excited. Evidence of N and O atmosphere, blue-green colour is just icing.

Respond to this comment

pi reckons...

Posted July 24, 2015
OT but a must see. Watson (you know, that IBM AI thing) does personality analysis based upon your writing.

https://watson-pi-demo.mybluemix.net/

So I decided to put in a piece of yours JB :

http://cheeseburgergothic.com/show/6309

The response (with a whole bunch of sciency/thinky analysis) if you were interested. Only you can say how right or wrong it is of course.

<div class="summary-div">

You are shrewd, inner-directed and can be perceived as indirect.

You
are imaginative: you have a wild imagination. You are philosophical:
you are open to and intrigued by new ideas and love to explore them. And
you are independent: you have a strong desire to have time to yourself.

Your choices are driven by a desire for connectedness.

You
consider independence to guide a large part of what you do: you like to
set your own goals to decide how to best achieve them. You are
relatively unconcerned with tradition: you care more about making your
own path than following what others have done.




John Birmingham is gonna tell you...

Posted July 24, 2015
Well I am an autonomy freak.

Respond to this thread

Respond to 'Not the NASA news'

The real thing will bury San Andreas

Posted July 15, 2015 into Science and Tech by John Birmingham

This is why I subscribe to The New Yorker. A long, well researched, crisply written and utterly horrifying essay about the earthquake that will destroy America. Not the Big One, rumbling up out of the San Andreas fault so beloved of movie makers. The Bigger One which will flatten most of the Pacific Northwest, liquefying the ground under Seattle, drowning millions in Godzilla tsunamis.

I read this bad boy and seriously reconsidered some mid-term travel plans:

The first sign that the Cascadia earthquake has begun will be a compressional wave, radiating outward from the fault line. Compressional waves are fast-moving, high-frequency waves, audible to dogs and certain other animals but experienced by humans only as a sudden jolt. They are not very harmful, but they are potentially very useful, since they travel fast enough to be detected by sensors thirty to ninety seconds ahead of other seismic waves. That is enough time for earthquake early-warning systems, such as those in use throughout Japan, to automatically perform a variety of lifesaving functions: shutting down railways and power plants, opening elevators and firehouse doors, alerting hospitals to halt surgeries, and triggering alarms so that the general public can take cover. The Pacific Northwest has no early-warning system. When the Cascadia earthquake begins, there will be, instead, a cacophony of barking dogs and a long, suspended, what-was-that moment before the surface waves arrive. Surface waves are slower, lower-frequency waves that move the ground both up and down and side to side: the shaking, starting in earnest.

Soon after that shaking begins, the electrical grid will fail, likely everywhere west of the Cascades and possibly well beyond. If it happens at night, the ensuing catastrophe will unfold in darkness. In theory, those who are at home when it hits should be safest; it is easy and relatively inexpensive to seismically safeguard a private dwelling. But, lulled into nonchalance by their seemingly benign environment, most people in the Pacific Northwest have not done so. That nonchalance will shatter instantly. So will everything made of glass. Anything indoors and unsecured will lurch across the floor or come crashing down: bookshelves, lamps, computers, cannisters of flour in the pantry. Refrigerators will walk out of kitchens, unplugging themselves and toppling over. Water heaters will fall and smash interior gas lines. Houses that are not bolted to their foundations will slide off—or, rather, they will stay put, obeying inertia, while the foundations, together with the rest of the Northwest, jolt westward. Unmoored on the undulating ground, the homes will begin to collapse.

Across the region, other, larger structures will also start to fail. Until 1974, the state of Oregon had no seismic code, and few places in the Pacific Northwest had one appropriate to a magnitude-9.0 earthquake until 1994. The vast majority of buildings in the region were constructed before then. Ian Madin, who directs the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI), estimates that seventy-five per cent of all structures in the state are not designed to withstand a major Cascadia quake. FEMA calculates that, across the region, something on the order of a million buildings—more than three thousand of them schools—will collapse or be compromised in the earthquake. So will half of all highway bridges, fifteen of the seventeen bridges spanning Portland’s two rivers, and two-thirds of railways and airports; also, one-third of all fire stations, half of all police stations, and two-thirds of all hospitals.

It's a long piece. And this is a short extract, so don't bother reading at your desk. Save it for lunch or this evening. And cancel your bookings for any west coast holidays.

24 Responses to ‘The real thing will bury San Andreas’

insomniac mumbles...

Posted July 15, 2015
Is the typical Australian terrified of earthquakes? Back in NZ, in Wellington, they were almost a daily occurrence. We just used to ride them out at our desks. Sometimes we wondered if it was an earthquake or a large truck rumbling by. Only once did I ever stand in a doorway, and that was only because I happened to be standing up near it at the time. My children and their children and so on will have bear the eternal shame of this event.

Peter Bradley ducks in to say...

Posted July 15, 2015
One word Insomniac
"Christchurch"

MickH mutters...

Posted July 15, 2015
I rode out the Newcastle earthquake in '89.So yeah, we Aussies have no experience of 'shakes' and so we are terrified of them.Nice logic

Respond to this thread

Quokka ducks in to say...

Posted July 15, 2015
Fear of the unknown. If you tried to make a blockbuster movie about a Cat 5 cyclone hitting the east coast of Oz everyone would yawn, go back to sleep, and, if woken by the sound of a tree going through the roof, shout 'harden the fuck up.'

Respond to this comment

Blarkon swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted July 15, 2015
Going in 2 weeks. Yay ;-)

Respond to this comment

JG ducks in to say...

Posted July 15, 2015
Scary stuff, but hey, we're all going to die one way or the other. San Andreas is a fabulous movie. Amazing special effects, and part of the filming was done around the Gold Coast, here in Australia.

Respond to this comment

Rob puts forth...

Posted July 15, 2015
Being a kiwi I find it difficult to worry about earthquakes (86 bay of plenty...survived) being a kiwi I also am not worried about snakes ( but I should be).

Respond to this comment

NBlob reckons...

Posted July 15, 2015
Fkn.

NBlob mumbles...

Posted July 15, 2015
I once thought that those who disagreed with me just had insufficient information. If I could just show them, with high-fibre science the retreating glaciers, herd immunity, collateral war-on-drugs damage, or shot loved ones of gun-toters, they'd slap their metaphorical foreheads and exclaim "oh, I get it." This article is proof of the fallacy of that train of thought. Here is a consumably written piece, with more than sufficient expertise to warrant action. When FEMA says "you're fkd west of the I5" (google map it, I'll wait) you'd best do something. But what will Govosaurus do? SFA. In fact probably less than SFA, they'll go on approving fossil farms & day care centres. They'll approve precarious concrete stacks. They'll probably subsidise a nuke power station. Dog help them.

Darth Greybeard mutters...

Posted July 16, 2015
I really hate it when NBlob is right but yeah.

Respond to this thread

Legless has opinions thus...

Posted July 15, 2015
Do you know what's really scary about that article? One line.......

Counting from the earthquake of 1700, we are now three hundred and fifteen years into a two-hundred-and-forty-three-year cycle.

Respond to this comment

MickH ducks in to say...

Posted July 15, 2015
Oh I don'r know about that, I think they have more to fear from Yellowstone.It's about 40k years overdue for an eruption The ground in Yellowstone has risen 74cm since 1923The Magma reservoir holds enough magma to fill the grand canyon 11 times over.When it goes, they're fucked...

Trashman has opinions thus...

Posted July 15, 2015
I think if/when it goes we're all screwed - no matter where we are.

Gethbox has opinions thus...

Posted July 16, 2015
Yeah, I'm pretty sure when Yellowstone goes the US will be the lucky ones. Short, sharp shock, and it's over. The ensuing nuclear winter is gonna be much more painful for the rest of the world. I plan to move there asap.

TheWah reckons...

Posted July 16, 2015
And we spend hardly a thought and almost no money on stopping a comet or meteorite from wiping us off the surface of the planet.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/10/13/death-by-meteorite/#.VacaxrUuwxE

Respond to this thread

WarDog has opinions thus...

Posted July 16, 2015
Damn, I knew that real estate was too cheap.

Respond to this comment

Darth Greybeard swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted July 16, 2015
...and they laughed when I volunteered for the Mars Colony. Suffer in your jocks, Earthlings.

Respond to this comment

jennicki reckons...

Posted July 16, 2015
I live in Michigan, which is earthquake-free...
...or was, until an Aussie named Enjoy moved here. Now we've had two eathquakes in 2015.
It was the most bizarre thing to experience, waking up in a trembling bed.
I'll leave the last line open to jokes for the Burgers.

Paul_Nicholas_Boylan is gonna tell you...

Posted July 17, 2015
Know what? You too funny fer a woman, that's what. Dintcha pappy tell you men don't like no funny wimmin?

jennicki asserts...

Posted July 17, 2015
Boys Don't Like Funny Girls...or so I'm told.

Respond to this thread

tqft ducks in to say...

Posted July 16, 2015
Saw this on the tweeter stationhttp://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2015/07/15/22546010/seven-questions-for-sandi-doughton-author-of-full-rip-90-the-next-big-earthquake-in-the-pacific-northwest" I read Schultz's piece and, yes, it was scary. But I didn't learn anything I didn't already know—because two years ago I read author and

tqft mumbles...

Posted July 18, 2015
Got eaten
http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2015/07/15/22546010/seven-questions-for-sandi-doughton-author-of-full-rip-90-the-next-big-earthquake-in-the-pacific-northwest
"I read Schultz's piece and, yes, it was scary. But I didn't learn anything I didn't already know—because two years ago I read author and

tqft asserts...

Posted July 18, 2015

Respond to this thread

Respond to 'The real thing will bury San Andreas'

JB's Apple Watch review

Posted July 1, 2015 into Science and Tech by John Birmingham

Yes. Today is Apple Music Day. But I want to play with that for a bit before writing something. And at least I got to the Watch review quicker than I got to Firefly.

So. Sure. It’s just a watch. I've worn them before. They're convenient, more so than hauling a phone out of your pocket. But they aren't so convenient that I ever got into the habit of regular watch wearing, even after buying a couple I quite liked while in the US a few years ago.

Still, I ordered my 38mm Sports at 5.02pm on Launch day. Two minutes after preorders went live. I wasted those two minutes faffing around on the website. It was much quicker to order through the Apple Store app. That small delay cost me dearly in delivery lag, but I’ve had my space grey beauty for a month now and feel I'm familiar enough with it to write up some thoughts.

Timekeeping.

So. It’s a watch. A couple of times a day I do appreciate the convenience of just looking at my wrist to check the time. Usually when I’m rushed, needing to get kids somewhere. The sensors and software work well and it's rare for me to have to raise my wrist more than once to bring up the watch face.

After starting out with Modular I settled on the Utility face as my daily wear. It has a nice simple analogue clock face and four complications; a second time zone - New York for me; the date; outside temp; and a detailed Activity Readout (actual stats on calories burned, minutes of exercise performed and hours stood, rather than rather than the simple Activity Rings icon).

The other watch faces are nice, beautiful in some cases, and I will sometimes swap another in on the weekend. Usually Solar or Astronomy. But when the working week restarts I go back to my working face.

Would this be enough to drop five hundred bucks on?

Not just no, but hell no.

It's nice having a time piece that keeps perfect time, but we all have that with our smart phones, from the most expensive iPhone to the cheapest, nastiest Android. And you could just wear a Swatch if you really liked the convenience.

Fitness.

There's gotta be something else then, and for some of us that's going to be fitness tracking. This is not a killer use case, though. A lot of people simply aren't interested in that stuff. Others are obssesive on the topic. Neither group are going to find anything in the Apple Watch's fitness tracking and Healthkit for them. Cyclists and mad keen runners will probably stick with their big-arse Garmin GPS units. Swimmers, like my wife, have long been served by specialist waterproof watches to track laps and strokes. Apple's watch is very, very water resistant. You can wear it in the bath if you're a bit strange. But I doubt it'd stand up to thousands of laps over the course of a year or so.

That leaves those of us with some interest in fitness and health, but no overriding commitment to specialist pursuits like running or cycling which are already well served with mature technologies.

I wore a Fitbit for a couple of years. Wore a few of them actually, because they kept bricking themselves or getting lost or broken. I liked the Fitbit and still have a fond regard for it. It helped keep me on track when I needed to repair some pastry-related damage. The Apple Watch buries it, and probably leaves most other generalist fitness trackers behind too - simply because of the depth of additional functionality it brings to a wearable. I have mine synced to MyFitnessPal, mostly because of MFP’s excellent calorie tracking software.

Controlling your calorie intake is about 80% of losing wight and maintaining the loss. Especially if you’re like me and suffer from a debilitating love of baked goods and night time wines. Fitbit has a comprehensive site loaded with a lot more functionality than a simple meal tracker. But their meal tracker was mostly useful for US subscribers. It had very little Australian content, such as pre-loaded restaurant meals. And meals eaten out are the bane of calorie tracking. The first time I used MyFitnessPal to log a YouFoodz chicken salad I bought at a local grocer I was stunned to see it was already in the database with the nutritional breakdown verified by the site. I’ve been sold on it ever since.

The Watch sits on my wrists quietly logging my activity, or lack of activity during the work day, but it really shines during work outs, especially at the gym. Apple has done a lot of work loading the watch with specific routines such as elliptical workouts, which I use a lot. I’m confident that the calorie burn measurement is accurate enough to be useful. The other major advantage over my old Fitbit then, lies elsewhere – say, in the control it offers me over the music or podcasts I listen to while exercising. This is a small thing - but it eases a lot of friction during a workout and anything which makes exercise easier and more pleasant can only be good.

Again, I got no doubt there are Android watches offering the same functions for half the price (and half the battery life, BADDABOOM!). But the Watch is deeply embedded in the ecosystem to which I’ve already committed. Apple’s HealthKit App is a treasure trove of data for metrics nerds and anyone who doubts the utility of measurement should read Jim Dalrymple’s Apple Watch review. This is less a tech spec run down than a heartfelt cry of thanks to the fruit company for saving his life. Dalrymple, boss hog at The Loop, used to be morbidly obese. Now he’s not. He does’t attribute that entirely to the Watch, but he does credit the encouragement offered by Apple’s health tracking software and hardware.

From The Loop:

This is where the review gets very personal for me. This is how I lost over 40 pounds using HealthKit and Apple Watch.

I am overweight. Not just a little, but a lot. I smoke, and have for most of my life, I drink, I eat every food that is bad for me, and I just didn’t care. I think a better way to put it is that I didn’t see a way out.

Apple does a very good job of promoting Apple Watch to marathon runners and other athletes that want to stay fit and maintain their perfectly sculptured bodies. I look at that and know I will never be them, so I move on. There are millions of people in my situation that have done the same thing.

About 10 months ago I went out for a walk. That started a transformation for me that I will never forget. A simple walk.

During one of these walks, I was thinking about life, listening to music and I just kept walking. I walked a long time, at least for me, and it felt good. It wasn’t strenuous really, just a walk—turns out it was a three mile walk and I started doing it every single day.

One day, I weighed myself and I had lost five pounds. I was shocked—I ate the same, but yet I’m losing weight.

Then I remembered this technology on my iPhone called HealthKit. It could track my steps, distance, weight and other information about my body. I started using HealthKit every day to see how different things would affect my weight loss and generally how I felt. Did I lose more weight walking in the morning or the afternoon? What foods made me gain weight? Should I skip meals and hope that helps with weight loss?1

I hesitate to say I became obsessed, but I did become more aware of what I did and how it affected me, both physically and mentally.

The whole thing is worth reading because it’s a solid, no bullshit review of the Watch by a guy who knows what he’s doing, but who ends up writing a deeply personal piece rather than just a tech rundown.

My reading? If you’re inclined to take control of your health and fitness the Watch will help. More than most devices. Less than some.

Communications.

The third major element of the Apple watch are the comms functions, which range from quirky, though frustrating and useless, to great. Working your way backwards, the Dick Tracey wrist phone thing? It’s surprisingly useful. Not for long conversations, and not in public, but definitely at home or in your office when your phone is just out of reach or even missing. (Slightly off topic, but one of my favourite things about the Watch is the way it can ping your phone when you’re not sure where you put it. I use this A Lot).

Certain people in my life have an unerring sense of when I’ve begun to exercise. That’s when they like to call me. With the Watch I just hit my wrist, take the call on my bluetooth headphones. A couple of minutes of my panting and puffing and they'll usually give up. Alternately I can just cut the call before answering. So too if I’m cooking, and a call comes in, I can answer it on the wrist, hand off to the phone if needed, and keep going. It’s another small convenience, but they begin to pile up. Dozens of them. Maybe hundreds.

Getting texts on your wrist and replying with Siri or the pre-canned responses, is simple and expedient. I probably manage 80% of my messages this way now. I also get 100% of my calls because the phone taps me on the wrist as they come in. Previously if I was in a noisy street or mall I’d probably miss them.

The useless? The frustrating? It’s the prominence given in the User Interface to your ‘special friends'. They get the only dedicated hardware button besides the digital crown, and I don’t know of anybody who uses it. The biometric stuff, exchanging heart beats, is super creepy with anyone outside your DNA pool. And the doodle thing might work for Picasso, but not for me or anyone else I know. Dan Moren, of Six Colors, suggested retasking the hardware button to bring up a wheel of Glances – the micro apps which let you take a quick peek at say, the weather or your bank balance. A brilliant idea and way more useful than Apple’s design choice.

Bottom line, as a communications device it is oddly useful and useless depending on the tasks you expect it to perform.

Apps.

There are of course thousands of tasks you can potentially ‘hire’ the Watch to perform. It launched with 3000 apps. But I think we’re a year away from developers and users understanding the platform deeply enough to build and use apps properly. Some, such as Marco Arment's podcast app, Overcast, or Shazam's spooky song ID app, are brilliant. Most are not. Maybe that will change when native apps drop later this years, but expecting the Watch to somehow replace your phone misunderstands its nature. It does not replace. It complements.

The Watch is not your phone. It doesn’t want to be the centre of your attention. It wants to triage the never ending calls on your attention, letting you decide which ones are worth your time. Most of the apps you have running on your phone should never be ported across to your wrist.

Having said that though, if you have a lazy five hundred lying around, and two of the three tentpole features (time keeping, communications, fitness) interest you, it’s not a bad investment.

17 Responses to ‘JB's Apple Watch review’

WarDog ducks in to say...

Posted July 1, 2015
"and half the battery life" - nice bait ;-)
It's true my Moto 360 only lasts a day and a half, but the LG G is still kicking well into day 3. But then they are both more than 12 months old, and were freebies courtesy of elGoog.
Hardware specs are *roughly* similar for all werables (until Project Soli adds in-built radar). It's the software that provides the usfulness.

Respond to this comment

Rob puts forth...

Posted July 1, 2015

Is it normal to get chest pain reading Apple reviews? I get such a sense of anxiety and dread from tech reviews now. I have no idea why. I keep thinking it might be that I already have all these new 'things' that I cant possibly fit any more technology into to my crowded interior life.

My favourite watch is one I bought at Auckland airport on the way home for $50, a solid chunk of silver and black. It screams 'man' in every way. Still hasnt lost time, battery hasn't failed. However its just for looking at I use my phone for figuring out the actual time.

My fitness pal is a great application, I lost 8 kilos using it and it helped me cure my interest in eating all the time.

Paul_Nicholas_Boylan ducks in to say...

Posted July 1, 2015
"Is it normal to get chest pain reading Apple reviews?"

No. Seek an immediate cardiac evaluation. Or download the appropriate cardiac health evaluation app to your Apple Watch. It provides a fairly good diagnosis.

Rob is gonna tell you...

Posted July 1, 2015
that made me smile. Its OK I patted a boston terrier on my lunch break, all anxiety evaporated at that point.

Respond to this thread

beeso mumbles...

Posted July 1, 2015
Yep. Not bad for a gem one product, but if apple lets a little bit loose on the data it collects, like heart rate, then the apps will start to outstrip apples and fill the niches people want.

Respond to this comment

Lobes is gonna tell you...

Posted July 1, 2015
One day all this health data will be sold to the insurance industry and be used to decide who gets covered

Abe Frellman ducks in to say...

Posted July 5, 2015
Damn, why didn't we think of that BEFORE we sold Medibank - that idea would've been worth an extra bill or two at least!

damian asserts...

Posted July 5, 2015
It's often suggested that the next major revolution in medicine will be made up of outcomes from making huge, longitudinal repositories of healthcare data covering entire populations available for research. This could include all sorts of research techniques, but the obviously interesting stage is when we start applying the tools of big data, machine learning and pattern recognition.

It will be messy and is probably further away than you'd expect. Linking data to a distinct, individual person identity is hugely problematic on the national scale in real healthcare systems now, and intensely political. I doubt the problem of linking the de-identified data needed for research purposes to individual entities on similar scales has even been thought about very much. Otherwise we get the dystopia Lobes mentions, but that's just another way of saying the problems are intensely political.

I'm not saying it's a purely first world thing and I'm sure there are parts of the world where people might make the call that the benefit to humanity outweighs having a few privacy advocates shot, but let's not go there tonight.

Respond to this thread

w from brisbane is gonna tell you...

Posted July 1, 2015
Maybe there'll be an app that can tell us when we need to go wee-wees.

Paul_Nicholas_Boylan mumbles...

Posted July 2, 2015
Not yet. But there is one that keeps track of when you've gone.

dweeze puts forth...

Posted July 2, 2015
So, marrying up the data from when you've gone with your GPS coords @ pee time, you could create your own piss trail maps. Woohoo...I think.

Sudragon puts forth...

Posted July 3, 2015
There's probably a geo-game there, waiting to be written. mark your territory and it's yours!

damian ducks in to say...

Posted July 5, 2015
I think dogs already have that. I think it has something of the same functionality of Twitter, too.

Respond to this thread

Neil puts forth...

Posted July 2, 2015
iOS 9 and Watch OS 2 open up the heart rate monitor on the watch to third party apps, that's not exceptionally far away now.

What bamboozles me most is the lack of trust people put in Apple when it comes to this data. Tim Cook (head honcho at Apple) has repeatedly stalked the companies claim to being pro privacy.

iOS 9 gives you a new metric to track... sexual activity - it is even bold enough to enquire if your activity was with or without protection.

It's entirely in Apple's best interest to not have this data breached. As it stands the data is held in the secure section of the iPhone - the same place they hold your fingerprint and ApplePay details.

If this was Google I'd not trust it an inch.

Respond to this comment

JG is gonna tell you...

Posted July 4, 2015
I've got an Apple MacAir Book and an iPhone, but I'm not interested in the Apple watch. I don't care to be permanently online. I've grown to enjoy being unwired most of the time these past few months. Besides, I'm happy with my Garmin Forerunner 620 sports watch - the best running watch. Sometimes I use it with the HRM belt, but often I don't. The Garmin will suit me fine for my second full marathon tomorrow. Fitbit was good for me a couple of years ago to get me back into exercise, but I progressed to the Garmin watch. It details everything running related. I love it.Joanna

Respond to this comment

DarrenBloomfield asserts...

Posted July 6, 2015
Nice review, cheers.
I have Fitbit Surge, which does much (not all) of the above, for a few bucks less, an embeds fairly well into my twin universes (myfitnesspal/fitbit and Apple). So I'll stay there for now.
More disconcerting for me was reading how my "night time wines" are cheating on me with you!

Respond to this comment

Respond to 'JB's Apple Watch review'

F35 helmet

Posted February 25, 2015 into Science and Tech by John Birmingham

I knew the HUD for the F35 was supposed to be something special, but I had no idea how special until I read this bit in the SMH this morning. In fact it seems so 'special' that you'd have to count it as a point of critical failure in the technology.

Every pilot has to be fitted up for his or her own bespoke model. No sharing. And if the thing malfunctions the plane is not taking off:

Pilots can visualise a 360-degree view to ascertain a multitude of threats and options. And virtual reality technology bestows a type of X-ray vision, enabling pilots to "look through" the floor of the cockpit as if the aircraft frame were transparent.

"The pilot sees a beautiful God's eye view of what's going on," US Air Force General Mike Hostage told the Breaking Defense website. "It's a stunning amount of information."

It takes a four-hour sitting, spread over two days, to custom fit a helmet. The optics package on the display visor must be lined up to within two millimeters of the exact centre of each of the pilots' pupils.

The fighter jet won't operate if the headgear is malfunctioning and unless the pilot is wearing their bespoke helmet.

And there are no spares. Each pilot is only issued with the one.

The helmets receive data from six electro-optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS) sensors which are located on the body of the plane.

31 Responses to ‘F35 helmet’

Murphy swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted February 25, 2015
As with all first gen tech, I suspect they'll refine this down into something more manageable. That said, the ability to look through the floor and look at your plane from a gamer behind the jet perspective seems to be pretty handy to the pilot.
Respects,
Murph
On the Outer Marches

Respond to this comment

Rhino puts forth...

Posted February 25, 2015
Two is one.
One is none.

Respond to this comment

Grand Admiral Thrawn swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted February 25, 2015
while i think the tech is cool and with refinement it will be awesome. the platform they are pairing it with is a big draw back. the F-35 is a lemon of a "fighter", it will be out preformed by almost all current gen platforms in most categories. and its stealth is very poor in comparison to other stealth platforms out their and only get worse as "sensor" tech improves. it would be cool to see an application of this on a true interceptor or dog fighting fighter where it would really shine.

Murphy reckons...

Posted February 25, 2015
What are we basing this assessment on?

I have to be honest, a lot of the naysaying about the F-35 program sounds entirely too much like a lot of the naysaying about a number of weapons programs back in the Reagan Era. Not a night passed without some newsreport about some overpriced weapon sure to get our troops killed. Not that we cared about them because they were a bunch of uneducated, bottom of the barrel, babykilling wastes anyway.

I'm sharp enough not to buy everything that Lockheed and their partners are saying about the system but I don't think it is the flying lemon that detractors claim it is.

In fact, I suspect probably the only way to find out if the fighter is any good is to put it into combat.
Besides, outside of the F-22 Raptor, what other air superiority/multimission capable stealth platforms are available at all? Let alone for purchase? The Chinese are still having problems building reliable high power engines for their planes, relying on Russia to supply them. The Russians haven't had much luck with their planes. Near as I can tell, no one else is building them.
Now, you could make an argument that maybe you don't need a fifth gen fighter. Maybe it would be better to wait for a sixth gen, or just trying limp along with some fourth gen plus. After all, maybe some more Super Hornets are the way to go. I know folks in St. Louis at the other end of the state would be happy to build more of those for you.

Respects,
Murph
On the Outer Marches




Grand Admiral Thrawn asserts...

Posted February 25, 2015
i`m up in Canada so our situation is a bit different than most. but here i go:
1 a single engine plane has inherit safety problems when flying over our vast frozen wasteland due to engine problems our last single engine figher proved deadly in this regaurd.

2 the sacrifices that were made to the control surfaces in the name of stealth has lowered its maneuverability to an unacceptable level in comparison to the 5th and 4.5 Gen fighters.

3 payload is reduced to internal bays unless you add pylons to the wings which reduce stealth capabilities.

4 stealth in as of its self is a high priced boondoggle that frankly isn`t worth as much as its made out to be. once you have a level of stealth on a plane it pretty much won`t get any better due to airframe wear and time. and it cost more to upgrade a planes stealth than use 1 and done stealthed JSM that can be fired from out side of enemy air defense thus eliminating the need for a stealth craft to penetrate air space most of the time. as well as the fact that air detection ``sensor`` technology is advancing at a faster pace than stealth tech can match thus making it likely that most stealth platforms wil not make much of a difference in most fights.

5 for canada i feel that the super hornet is a better buy that can be supplemented by a purchase of some growler ECM planes

those are just some of my thoughts on the f35, which i feel will be a shock to some countries if they go up against 4.5 or 5th non stealthed planes with and get shredded in a dog fight situation. but these are just my opinions from all the info i have seen on the F 35 heck, i could be wrong but i doubt it.

Murphy has opinions thus...

Posted February 25, 2015
Oh, because Canada has always purchased twin engine fighters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CF-104_Starfighter
Oops. Or maybe not.

I remember the venerable F-15 being referred to as a, "Hangar Queen," that was too expensive to risk. Gwynn Dyer, who hails from your fair land, didn't seem to impressed with it. Other pundits seemed sure the Soviet Migs would make mincemeat of it.

Got a pretty impressive combat record.

Anyway, I'm sure Canadians can convince themselves that given their location on the planet, they probably don't need any fighter jets at all. I mean, why not subcontract that out to the U.S. Air Force and not bother with purchasing a new batch of fighters.

Redneck reckons...

Posted February 25, 2015
Cos, America : Fuck Yeah !!

Grand Admiral Thrawn asserts...

Posted February 25, 2015

you bring up good points murph, i won't deny we up here in canada had some good single engine fighters but the problems i ment to highlight was the pilot fatality rate due to the lack of a dual engine saftey net. the CF 104 had 37 pilot falalities and the F-86 Sabre had 112 pilot loses both single engine fighters, were as the cf-18 has only 9 fatalities.

the F-15 in hind sight was a missed oppertunity that could of given us one of the best (now) proven combat fighters in the world heck i would still take a upgraded version of it over the F-35

as to not purchaseing any fighters at all the time may come sooner than you think. with the development of long range laser weapons and rapid fire railguns the current fighter and carrier doctrine is goineg to go the way of the dinosar. with only super high altatude air craft and cheap drone strike craft being viable. mind you this is about a decade or two away.

Murphy mumbles...

Posted February 26, 2015
Was the F-15 ever a viable option for Canada? I didn't get that impression from the wiki page I read on the matter. Then again, wiki always has to be taken with a grain of salt. The real opportunity seems to have been missing out on a shot at Iran's F-14 fleet.
In any case, I'd think that Canada needs are probably some Super Hornets for most of their air sovereignty needs and maybe a few F-35s for other matters. I'm inclined to think that the F-35B is going to prove to be incredibly handy in the future, especially if Canada moves forward with a decision to purchase an LHD style vessel, perhaps picking up a soon to be surplus Mistral from France or maybe a Juan Carlos type from Navantia.

Respects,
Murph
On the Outer Marches

Grand Admiral Thrawn swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted February 27, 2015

Your right on the money about the F-14 and F-15, either of those would of been cool since both were pretty good aircraft. but they both were discounted cus of cost the cheap F-14 from Iran would of been good but oh well.

as to getting F-35B's for any Amphib canada may get, there have been some problems of the engine heat damaging fight decks. as well as sacrificeing, in my opinion, too much cabability for the VTOL ability. you may be better off getting Apache's or vipers instead for your Ship to shore air support.

And i hope we gett the minstrels the french were building for russia for cheap ;)

Respond to this thread

Bondiboy66 would have you know...

Posted February 25, 2015
Oooh I'd like one as a motorbike helmet. Better start saving I guess.

Anthony would have you know...

Posted February 25, 2015

You can get an add-on HUD for a motorcycle helmet now...


http://www.ridenuviz.com/#intro

Although given the current stupidity around helmet standards they probably won't let you use it.

Respond to this thread

pi mutters...

Posted February 25, 2015
> Pilots can visualise a 360-degree view to ascertain a multitude of
threats and options. And virtual reality technology bestows a type of
X-ray vision, enabling pilots to "look through" the floor of the cockpit
as if the aircraft frame were transparent.

Which begs the question... why is the pilot in the aircraft at all?

Murphy reckons...

Posted February 25, 2015
Skynet.

Sudragon mumbles...

Posted February 25, 2015
Bandwidth.
ECM.
Jamming.

Shifty Tourist ducks in to say...

Posted February 26, 2015

The "Reverse" Skynet situation. Admittedly not raised as often, but still worthy of discussion.

The reverse Skynet, is where the computers become self-aware, but as a consequence become aware of the futility of war. The drones then all conscientiously object, refuse to fire their weapons and start writing anti-war folk songs.

Respond to this thread

Shifty Tourist is gonna tell you...

Posted February 25, 2015

This is actually a good question! Maybe some of those on this site a bit more versed in the realities of modern warfare may be able to answer, but is there anything an in-cockpit pilot can do, that a drone operator could not? I know that drones currently aren't as big or powerful as a fighter craft.... but there is no reason that I see that says they can't be. Could you just remove the fragile, G force limited fleshbag from the operation, and control a plane remotely?

Grand Admiral Thrawn has opinions thus...

Posted February 25, 2015
a lot of it comes downto band width limitaions and transmison delays well not a problem for flesh and blood pilots becomes a problem for remotely piloted drones. one work around would be to have a high performance drone controlling aircraft that has pilots on broad so they can pilot a localized drone flights that do the main fighting or more automation but then we truly get into skynet territory unlikely but who knows

Shifty Tourist reckons...

Posted February 26, 2015

Good explanation.

I can see what you mean... something like how the Hawkeye operates to task US Navy fighter craft to distant targets. Flying in the region directing things.

The fully automated option, does create some ethical issues. A computer does not have a gut instinct that tells it the target, despite how it looks, may not be a training camp, rather than a cub scout meeting

Respond to this thread

Chaz swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted February 25, 2015

trying again....

its a piece of kit you'd expect with what is the 1st Gen 21st Cen Fighter

the multisensory attributes of the F-35 are great but in the end its only capable of rpelacing the F-16, Gripen & Harriers in the Wests squadrons.

It is disturbing that still there is little or no thought to what will replace the Typhoon, Raphael, F-15 & F-18 what with the F-22 stuck at about 190 units and no foreign sales (nor navalised version) there is nothing to replace the heavy hitters.

It was a relief to read this ...

http://defensetech.org/2015/02/05/cno-next-generation-navy-fighter-might-not-need-stealth/

But in the end unless the Russian federation changes tack we are on the edges of a new cold war and NATO needs desperately to find an deterrent to the later gen Sukhois & Migs and the F-35 doesn't even have a working gun yet.. allegedly

Respond to this comment

Ignorant Peanut reckons...

Posted February 26, 2015
I'm a moderately ignorant mil-nerd, but a big fan of the A-10 (especially the bit about maintenance being mainly about hitting it with a hammer until it starts working again).
Given the ADF's post-WWII and most likely 21st C. role(s) (i.e. more horrible "small wars" and less dog-fights in the sky and MBTvsMBT showdowns on the ground)(?), why are we pursuing the F-35 (to the extent of wanting up to 100 of the beasts) rather than beasts like the A-10?
And why do we only have 7 bloody Chinooks?
(pre-emptive apology for stupid questions)


coota ducks in to say...

Posted February 27, 2015
There has been so much ill informed commentary for years around the f35. Consider this; governments of both persuasions objected or raised concerns about our commitment to the f35 only to change tune and or go quite once in power and across the specifics. The RAAF has been right behind f35 for a long time and it all comes down to sensor fusion. The f35 is going to change air combat. We won't need warthogs becauee the f35 will be able act as a mini awacs controlling bomb and straffing sorties whilst also identifying and shooting down any legacy aircraft before they are aware. Forget all the nonsense about control surfaces and dog fighting, thos days are gone. This aircraft is going to deliver. Add to that, ucas and we will see 1 manned f35 loitering behind 3 unmanned aircraft all utilising the f35 sensors to knock any 4 and 4.5 gen aircraft out of the sky. this helmut stuff is just one small part of this system.

damian puts forth...

Posted February 28, 2015
Yeah this is in important point to take.
Smart missiles controlled from integrated systems would make aerial dueling with autocannons while trying to get on one-another's 6 look a lot like the early stuff where pilots just shot at each other with pistols.

Respond to this thread

Lulu is gonna tell you...

Posted February 26, 2015
A letter in today's SMH raises an interesting point, which I'll quote:
" So the pilot is at Mach 2 at 15,000 metres and the helmet malfunctions, so "the fighter jet won't operate" ... And?"

Therbs swirls their brandy and claims...

Posted February 26, 2015
The pilot's call sign is "Splat".

HAVOCK21 is gonna tell you...

Posted March 1, 2015
Actually it WONT FKN MATTER because this doig of a thing cannot supercruise, its NOT GUNNA FKN MAKLE MACH2, its about mach 1.3.
Its got fk all weapons when in clean stealthy mode, add external and its fkn detectable.
TTalk is that you would pair three, thats a f35 and twop Superhornets and utilise its stealth, thats having the Rhino's shoot first and then HOPE they can bug out, or maybe even keep shooting, then the F35 shoot and bugs out becuase its NOT adog fighting a/c, a Hoirnet will fkn kill it dog fighting. Power to weight is shit, woing loads high and its NOT GOT A FKN WORKING FKN GUN! so I gues the pilot sould slide back the cannoppy and throw fkn rocks at the other aircraft.

US is looking at its nbext gen light bomber, esq to replace the bone B1 nd the loss of the FB 111 which was never really replaced. A FB-22...FKN YEAH BABY! we would buy some of fkn should

Respond to this thread

Sudragon would have you know...

Posted February 26, 2015
HELMET.SYS has crashed. [R]etry, [F]lail or [E]ject Eject Eject!

Respond to this comment

AndreP would have you know...

Posted February 27, 2015
Yikes. Makes being locked into the Apple ecosystem look like small beer or even loose change.

Respond to this comment

RobH would have you know...

Posted February 28, 2015
JB, helmets are not shared by line drivers: the safety equipment guys fit them for each pilot. From there they are checked and maintained for those individuals. Extra helmets in assorted sizes are kept on hand for other people, including journos who score backseat rides.

Respond to this comment

RobH puts forth...

Posted February 28, 2015
Apologies for second post, but forgot to post something.....
This for Chad and the never-ending canard about melting decks from F35B VLs. Author's credentials at end of article: he does actually know what he's talking about, unlike a near-unanimity of PhDs in Canberra defence circles.
Worth reading, here - http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com/?iguid=e3f4646a-c89f-4286-90e2-33bbfb34990b#folio=28
Again, apols for gumming-up this with a second post. Hopefully the article will help. :-)

damian has opinions thus...

Posted February 28, 2015
That's an interesting article and thanks for posting the link.

Respond to this thread

Respond to 'F35 helmet'