Password? It’s at my fingertip!

Technology has moved passwords from the tip of your tongue to the tip of your fingers, claims a tech fan.

AD: Hey, do you know that Apple is coming out with a new typewriter called iType?

BC: What???

AD: Now that I have your attention, here’s the real news – Apple has launched the iPhone 5s with Touch ID.

BC: What's that?

AD: Amazing how your question remains unchanged regardless of whether it’s a typewriter or an iPhone. Touch ID is a biometric system that uses your fingerprint as a security device to unlock your mobile. So your fingerprint becomes your digital signature or your password...

BC: But what if I hurt my fingers? What if they're bandaged or have a plaster on them? What if I nick them while...

AD: Hold on, you can record up to five fingerprints, so any of them can be used.

BC: But think of all those people who use their hands and their fingers at work - musicians, homemakers who cook and wash, writers who type non-stop... So what'll they use if their fingers get worn out - their pet's paw print?

AD: Well, a cat's paw print has already been used to unlock the 5s, but that’s because it was registered as one of the five possible impressions that can unlock the phone.

BC: So how long does it take to unlock a phone using Touch ID?

AD: Possibly a second - the amazing part is that you don't have to place the finger in the same way that you did when you registered the fingerprint. The sensor is smart enough to detect the impression from any angle...

BC: Computers, phones, digital music players, tablets - and now fingerprint recognition. I can't see where Apple is going with this...

AD: In fact, Apple planned for this over a year ago and bought over a company called AuthenTec, which specialises in fingerprint readers and ID management software.

BC: But is it safe? There are so many instances of hacking that we read about...

AD: Ok, a hacking team that calls itself the Chaos Computer Club seems to have confirmed your worst fears - it claims to have cracked the security system and has even posted videos of how it went about it. This happened less than three days after the launch... And wipe that smug expression off your face.

BC: So how has the response been to Touch ID and to the 5s?

AD: According to reports, over six million customers have ordered the 5s in the first weekend of its launch...

BC: Great, so that's six million fingerprints, and with five options each, it's 30 million in all. Where are all these fingerprints stored?

AD: I see where you're going with this. Your fingerprints are digitally encrypted and stored in your mobile's processor, so in case you think Apple has access to them or that they are all stored in a central server, waiting to be hacked...

BC: But I still don't understand all this fuss over unlocking a phone.

AD: Isn't using your finger to unlock the device a lot simpler than entering a 4-digit passcode each time?

BC: There have been other instances where fingerprint authentication has been tried out, but has not proved to be very successful...

AD: The latest technology is fine-tuning the whole process. It's not just Apple - other mobile manufacturers are also throwing in their lot with fingerprint identity sensors. Computers and tablets are also following suit...

BC: So what happens if I've left my mobile home and my wife wants to use it?

AD: There's always a backup - you can opt to use the regular passcode, as with all iPhones. In fact, there's also an option by which you can choose to disable Touch ID.

BC: With half the world choosing to use 1234 as the passcode, I'm not sure which is scarier of the two – a finger that's broken or a security feature that can easily be broken into.

When the office comes home...

‘Technology has made it possible to bring the office home, but can it keep the two apart?’ An old-timer wonders...

BC: Hi, what's the matter? It's almost noon and you still haven't gone to work...

AD: Actually, I'm at work.

BC: I don't understand...

AD: I'm going to be telecommuting for the next six months...

BC: Tele-what? Is that what they do in Star Trek when they magically appear in some other place?

AD: No, that's teleportation. Telecommuting is about working from home – or any remote location - with the help of technology…

BC: What's new about that? Even when you sit in your office, you use a lot of technology...

AD: Precisely! That’s why companies have now begun to allow employees to work from home. They can reach us by mail or over the phone. Or I could get on to Skype or a chat session. Teleconferencing, video conferences, file sharing – I can do them all from home. And at the end of the day, I wrap up and mail my work across and that's that.

BC: I can't imagine working from home.

AD: Why not?

BC: Because to me, home is an area of calm. It’s the place I come back to after weathering many a storm – at the workplace, at client meetings and in traffic. If you're going to drag the office home, you're bringing along the stress and the pressures of work to your bedroom. So how are you…

AD: Well, with laptops, smartphones and tablets, work moved into our homes long before you realised it. So why not formalise the arrangement?

BC: But how do you end a working day? Where do you draw the line between work and personal life when both are fighting to coexist in the same place?

AD: That calls for time management and good planning. Besides, look at the positives - no more strenuous drives in peak hours, no more traffic jams, no more office politics…

BC: For years, man has been deputing technology to do his work for him. And somewhere along the way, technology has made a backdoor entry into his house and has programmed his life in a way that, instead of waking up and checking out the sunrise from his window, he ends up booting up Windows and checking his mails as soon as he gets up.

AD: But you can spend more time with the family, both because you can work from home and because you save time on commutes.

BC: You're kidding me! You'll probably use up all that time updating your status messages and checking out forwards...

AD: Look at other positives - you don't have to dress up any longer to go to work. I'm sure you would have liked that...

BC: In fact, half the people these days look like they crawled out of bed and went straight to work. Regardless of all that you say, I foresee lots of problems with working from home...

AD: Like what?

BC: You can't call in sick. You can't crib about your boss. You can't catch up on watercooler gossip. You'll never know how much the next guy is making...

AD: As always, you need to find something to crib about, don't you? Besides, this is not about you. The current generation loves it, so...

BC: I'm sure they do. I'm also sure that school kids these days must be wondering why their folks are forever having that zombie expression on their faces and are lounging around all day at home in their nightclothes while they have to wear their uniforms and go to school, five days a week. I’m not sure if they’ll thank technology for it.

AD: Despite all that you say, more and more people are now getting inspired to work from home…

BC: Guess I need to start going to the office too…

AD: I thought you were retired…

BC: I was. But, now that your generation is going to work from home, I guess workplaces will be a lot more peaceful...

When earthlings turn Martians

‘Technology finally gives mankind an out-of-this-world experience – in Mars,’ announces a tech fan.

AD: Hi, did you apply to go to Mars?

BC: Do you know that it’s a one-way ticket? Why would anyone want to go there?

AD: Landing on the moon was nothing more than a Tintin adventure for decades, until it really happened. As for Mars, it has been the subject of several sci-fi movies and spoofs, until Mars One announced this trip…

BC: It sounds more like a horror movie – imagine people volunteering, knowing that they’ll never return! News has it that arrangements will be done to cremate those who die there...

AD: Initially, 40 candidates will be shortlisted and trained, from which four will finally make it. So why would anyone want to miss out on this chance?

BC: Haven't you read about the Mars curse? There have been so many missions to Mars in the past decades that have failed at various stages...

AD: Perhaps technology will evolve enough in the coming decade to undo the curse and also prolong lives...

BC: In that case, why don't you use technology and find a way to bring the space passengers back? Surely, you are aware that the reason they're staying on is because we haven't figured out a way of powering the return journey...

AD: You never know - they might come up with something by then. Can you believe that the application fee is between $25 and $38, depending on the country one is from? That's probably cheaper than a video game featuring a Martian attack...

BC: But I read that the mission will cost over $6 billion... They will probably need half the United States to apply, for them to cover the costs....

AD: While the reports say that over 165,000 have already applied, I'm not sure how many more will, because the maiden flight will carry only two males and two females. However, they're planning to follow it up with a second flight in 2025.

BC: All these numbers and dates make my head spin - are these guys serious? Is this really going to happen? It sounds like a George Lucas film that's coming to life...

AD: Apparently, a couple of commercial cargo missions have already been made. Besides, they're going to start various missions to Mars to create a settlement there, sometime in 2016. The landing systems will also be tested several times to ensure that all goes well...

BC: What happens if they fall sick or if there's an emergency?

AD: Well, they'll have to handle it themselves...

BC: Are you telling me that while cremation facilities are being made, there will be no medical facilities?

AD: Look, you can't plan for contingencies, but you can plan for certainties, right? But jokes apart, the chosen candidates will be given training for around seven years. Do you know that over 8000 Indians have applied?

BC: Can't blame them. Think of the rising fuel costs - $25 can't cover a person’s fuel costs for a week, but now...

AD: ...it can get him to Mars.

BC: Right! And how long does it take to reach Mars?

AD: Around seven months.

BC: And once they're gone, how will the world know about them?

AD: There will be extensive media coverage, and everything from the shortlisting of astronauts and the final selection, to their voyage will be covered by the electronic media.

BC: So that's the miracle that technology's giving you - a one-way space voyage and a long-lasting reality show on TV. What about Facebook updates? I can see a ‘Yuck, Mars is so dusty’ message coming up…

AD: Stop being cynical about it. Isn't this expedition bringing together the best of science, telecom, space technology and...?

BC: More than what it brings together, I'm excited about what it can take away...

AD: I don't get you.

BC: How about nominating all those people you don't want to see on earth? Isn't it a great way to clean up the planet?

When newspapers make headlines…

Evolving technology and changing habits are making things tougher for newspapers, claims a tech fan.

BC: What do you think the future will be like?

AD: What happened? Read something terrible in the newspapers today?

BC: No, I read something terrible about the newspapers today.

AD: What do you mean?

BC: Well, newspapers formally began their journey with printed editions in the late 1600s. 300 years later, they extended their reach to the online medium. Soon, we began to have digital versions of newspapers. And now, we’ve reached a point where online newspapers have more takers...

AD: That's because they’re more convenient and certainly more updated...

BC: As a result, the print version began to vanish and web-only newspapers began to thrive. And now, we hear websites buying over newspapers - a far cry from the days when newspapers powered news portals to extend their presence online...

AD: Ok, now I get it... You're obviously upset by Jeff Bezos buying over Washington Post.

BC: But Bezos is not the first tech celebrity to buy a newspaper - Chris Hughes, the co-founder of Facebook bought The New Republic, but...

AD: What are you trying to say?

BC: Technology played a crucial role in ruining the newspaper industry - and now you claim it is rushing to the aid of a struggling newspaper.

AD: Look at it this way - if Bezos plans to marry tradition and technology, we could then have ‘The Washington E-Post’, a futuristic e-paper that could look like something straight out of a Harry Potter book or a Spielberg movie...

BC: I don't think the value of a newspaper can be expressed enough to this generation. When I was working, I remember starting the day with the front pages, reserving the sports and entertainment sections for the train ride to my client's place, and finally solving the crossword, word jumble and other puzzles on my way back from work. By the end of the day, I would have pored through every section of the paper...

AD: Look, it's about business and profits, not about emotions and nostalgia... Besides, who has the time for that today?

BC: Today's generation has all the time in the world for forwards, for posting status messages about burnt toast and for checking their status updates a hundred times a day, but then, where's the time to read a newspaper?

AD: But they’re getting their news feed by the minute on their mobiles - accept the fact that newspapers are losing out to their smarter e-versions…

BC: How can newspapers compete with an adversary that offers services free of cost? In fact, it is a double whammy because with more people preferring digital newspapers worldwide, the traditional print media is not only losing its readership, but also its advertising revenue - with readership dropping, advertisers are also moving away towards the electronic media.

AD: How can you blame them for moving towards where the eyeballs are? Besides, this is nothing new. Radio was challenged by TV, which is being challenged by the internet. It's all about reinventing yourself and keeping pace with the times...

BC: What rankles the industry is the fact that people can go straight to Google News and get all the news they want, free of cost. It's like a free online library...

AD: Google is actually directing readers to different newspaper sites - according to statistics, the site facilitates around six billion hits to various newspaper sites.

BC: But at the rate at which things are going, Google might be playing a much bigger role than we can ever imagine.

AD: How?

BC: All along, we used Google to search for news and information. Now, we might have to use it to locate the whereabouts of the newspapers that are vanishing from the scene.

The day the music died…

An old-timer cribs about the one thing that music can do without, but is forced to live with – technology.

AD: Hey, what are you listening to?

BC: Some vintage wonders from the 60s. They simply don't...

AD: ...make such music any more, right?

BC: It's clichéd, but true, isn't it? There's something so simple and nice about those songs that makes you want to close your eyes and lose yourself in them...

AD:  Why would you want to compare music from two different eras?

BC: Technology is the key difference - its excessive use is bringing down the standard of music today, especially in the movies...

AD: Why do you say that?

BC: Music seems to be created more by computers and software than by composers today. Back then, we had songs played out by large orchestras. Imagine all those violins and flutes and...

AD: Today's music is snappy and is obviously loved by the present generation, otherwise it wouldn't continue to exist.

BC: But there's no soul in most of the songs we hear today. They don't draw you into their world... Synthetic, metallic and noisy are the kind of adjectives that one would choose to describe today's music...

AD: Those are sweeping statements, probably based on what you've listened to... Movie songs are so vastly different across languages... the south possibly prefers music with a local flavour, while Hindi numbers are getting increasingly westernized...

BC: But technology has changed the way music is composed - so much of it is pre-programmed and the focus seems to be on mixing it right and not on creating fresh music.

AD: If not for technology, a lot of old-world music could be lost forever... Thanks to digital technology, several songs that would otherwise have been wiped out have been restored. There was an interesting article a couple of months back about how scientists used X-rays to restore a 200-year old opera...

BC: Ah, it must have revealed the skeletal structure of the song… But seriously speaking, I don’t have a problem with technology. It’s only that we seem to rely so heavily on it to...

AD: And what about the treasure trove of old songs that video sites like YouTube offers us? Practically every song and every piece of music that you would want to listen to or search for is available online...

BC: iTunes' library is equally impressive...

AD: Even accessing these songs has become simpler, as these songs are forwarded and shared many times over on social networking sites...

BC: I have a friend who shares old songs with little gems of information about them on Facebook...

AD: I know, I get those links too. And what about mobile downloads? You don't even have to carry a CD player any longer - your mobile has become your personal music player...

BC: Today, iPods and mp3 players have wiped out the music stores and several CD labels…

AD: And all those services with free downloads will eat into the market share of paid services like iTunes, Deezer and Spotify. That’s the point - technology keeps evolving, but the music continues…

BC: I recall an article that talked about a cellular service provider making more money through song downloads than music companies...

AD: That's right. Can you imagine the joy of carrying a thousand songs in your pocket?

BC: The problem is that when you get addicted to downloads, quantity scores over the finer aspects of a song. I get the feeling that people are spending more time downloading songs than they are, listening to them.

AD: But think of the advantages - there was a time when you had to hunt around for LP records or wait for the radio to play your favourite songs. But now, you can download them in about a minute.

BC: That timeframe is quite significant.

AD: Why, because downloads have become that fast?

BC: No, because that's all the time that people remember a song for. After that, it's time to move on to the next big chartbuster...

When technology goes for a six

With all the slips made by the DRS, is technology simply ending up becoming a silly point in cricket?

BC: Hi, have you been following the England vs Australia test series?

AD: Sad to see Australia’s journey downhill, but if there's something that's become a hotter topic of discussion than the Ashes, it's...

BC: ...the Decision Review System.

AD: Absolutely. But I still don't get what the fuss is all about.

BC: Well, the game was getting along fine without the intrusion of technology. But now, it’s kicked up a nasty storm...

AD: If you had followed the tests, you would know that there was human error as well. For instance, if someone forgets to activate Hot Spot and keeps it in the replay mode, how can you blame technology? Likewise, if the third umpire makes a mistake in interpreting the DRS, why is it the fault of...

BC: Look, the system was never 100% accurate to start with.

AD: Are you telling me that you will adopt technology only if it's perfect? So your mobile has never suffered signal drops, your laptop has never crashed, your hard disk has never...

BC: They do, but I don't let them decide anything for me, the way DRS is allowed to in cricket. Besides, cricket has this glorious uncertainty that's getting marred by programming technology into it.

AD: Are you suggesting that we go backwards and remove DRS from the game?

BC: But if it doesn't work satisfactorily, what's the point in holding on to it?

AD: Imagine what would have happened had the corporate world rejected computers in the 1940s because they were the size of a room, or if households rejected the PC in the 80s because it had less than 30MB of storage space...

BC: So what's your point?

AD: Technology evolves over the years - we need to give it both space and time...

BC: But think of the controversies until then - remember the 2011 World Cup? There were so many issues back then too...

AD: Look, DRS is meant to be a combination of various technologies, including Hot Spot and Hawk Eye, but for various reasons, Hot Spot was never implemented during the World Cup.

BC: They used super slow motion replays and stump mikes…

AD: How can you expect a system to work if all its components are not in place? Isn't it our mistake that we don't do things the right way and then scream blue murder when they go wrong?

BC: I would still maintain that life was simpler before DRS…

AD: Okay, let me put it this way. On TV, you use technology to get up close and show every little nick and miss, right down to the tiniest millimetre by which a bowler has overstepped or a batsman has fallen short of his crease. If you don't use the same technology to determine whether the batsman is out or not, you will infuriate the fans who will feel hard done by the umpire.

BC: But that's how cricket has always been played. Besides, neutral umpires were introduced to get rid of the home team bias...

AD: Instead of complaining about technology, why can't the umpires and the players be trained to use it better? Besides, technology is already in use by umpires to determine run outs, no-balls, stumpings and illegitimate catches caught after the ball bounced – so what’s wrong in extending it to lbws and other forms of dismissals as well?

BC: You'll have to ask the ICC that. But if the DRS continues, it might pose a health hazard to the Aussies…

AD: How is that?

BC: They are the ones who seem badly affected by it. And with all that exposure to infrared technology and heat signatures, the Australian cricketers may not go home with the Ashes – but they sure could leave with a lot of rashes. 

Quiet please - technology at play

The eclectic mix of tradition and technology is what makes Wimbledon so special, claims a tech fan.

AD: Hi there, feeling sad that Wimbledon's over?

BC: I was looking forward to another Federer - Nadal final, but...

AD: Well, it doesn't matter who plays, but as far as I'm concerned, technology seems to be winning hands down these days.

BC: Why can't you just watch the game for the game’s sake? Besides, Wimbledon has always been the domain of traditionalists – don’t tell me the geeks have taken over…

AD: But…

BC: So which aspect of technology are you referring to? The one used for the line call?

AD: It's called Hawkeye.

BC: The same system used in cricket?

AD: Yes, isn’t it unbelievable? Ball tracking, simulation and graphics all come together in a fraction of a second...

BC: And what happened to that one-eyed giant who was monitoring the lines and the net?

AD: Cyclops? That technology has been retired, in favour of a more visual aid...

BC: I'm sure some former players would be sore that they had to put up with the loud beeps that would shatter the silence and make people jump out of their skins...

AD: Well, there’s silence only if the likes of Serena Williams or Sharapova are not playing – their grunts have broken several decibel records. But the former players have several other things to feel jealous about...

BC: Like what?

AD: IBM has been closely associated with Wimbledon and has created programs for player stats, match analysis and performance analysis, all of which are helping both players and coaches, big time. In fact, they launched a service called Player Report back in 1994, which analysed the strengths and weaknesses of players...

BC: So players can not only better their own game, but also study their opponents.

AD: Absolutely, and in 1999, they installed displays for the speed guns, which made spectators gasp with disbelief when the likes of Kafelnikov and Greg Rusedski boomed at over 200 kmph.

BC: I still remember Sampras' comprehensive victory over Agassi in that final...

AD: What about the 2008 epic final when Nadal beat Federer? That was the year when Wimbledon scores could be tracked online...

BC: That was a heck of a match, but I thought the Wimbledon website had come up before 2008...

AD: I was referring to SlamTracker, a system that used player patterns and past records to enable fans to play a more active role while watching matches. As for the website, the official Wimbledon site came up in 1995.

BC: I still remember watching McEnroe versus Borg in my black & white TV, in the early 80s...

AD: We’ve come a long way from there. Today, you can follow all the action on your mobile. 2009 saw the first iPhone app for Wimbledon and this year, the iPad app has been launched – reports have it that it has some really exciting video content and camera angles...

BC: That's good news for the fans...

AD: Well, even the umpires benefitted from technology – computerized score pads were introduced in 1999.

BC: But technology being used to update scores is not new.

AD: In that case, how would you react to technology that measures players' energy levels and stamina, their movement across the court, their speed and many other aspects of their performance? It's called SecondSight.

BC: Talking of stamina, I must confess that it’s getting increasingly exhausting.

AD: You’re referring to the five setters, aren’t you, like the one between Djokovic and del Potro?

BC: No, I was talking about keeping pace with technology, for fans like me. By the time we set up all these gadgets, tune in to the match, study the stats available, analyse the data and arrive at our conclusions, we will be more tired than these magnificent men in their epic five-setters.