At E3, Sony Attempts to Keep Its Edge Over Xbox


Destiny. Image: Courtesy of Sony

Destiny. Image: Courtesy of Sony



Closing out a day full of press conferences at the E3 Expo in Los Angeles, Sony spent its time telling players that, whatever their game of choice, they’ll be able to play it earlier or with more content on PlayStation platforms.


Truly exclusive games are a rarer thing today than they have been in the past; with game costs rising, most developers and publishers want to go multiplatform to make as much money as possible. But platform holders want to be able to stress that they’ve got something that the other guy doesn’t. So we’re seeing the battle over partial exclusives: Maybe the game gets exclusive downloadable content on one platform, or releases first there.


Microsoft has had this concept locked up for the Call of Duty series for some time, ensuring that the map packs and other content come to Xbox first, and the new version for Xbox One will be no exception, it said earlier today. But what Sony lacks on the Call of Duty front, it’s aggressively trying to nail down for any other game it can.


At its E3 press conference, it noted that, among other advantages, PlayStation 4 owners will get to play the first-look alpha version of Destiny, the new game from the creator of Halo, starting this Thursday, then get into the game’s beta first on July 17. If Ubisoft’s upcoming Far Cry 4 is more your speed, you can invite your PS4 friends to play cooperatively with you — even if they don’t own the game.


The new version of Blizzard’s Diablo III on PlayStation will include a dungeon themed after Sony’s game The Last of Us. The upcoming Disney Infinity 2.0: Marvel Super Heroes will have a special edition only on PlayStation platforms and a 30-day exclusive on the Incredible Hulk character. Batman: Arkham Knight will have exclusive PlayStation levels as well.


And — amazing news for nerds like me — Tim Schafer’s classic adventure game Grim Fandango (now owned by Disney after its purchase of LucasArts) will be making a return, on PlayStation 4 first. Those were just a few of the announcements in that vein.


Sony Computer Entertainment America’s new CEO Shawn Layden took the stage, a touch less practiced than the company’s old hands like Andrew House and Shuhei Yoshida, to make some announcements regarding new PlayStation services. PlayStation Now, the company’s streaming-games service, will go into open beta on PlayStation 4 in July. Over 100 games from many third-party publishers will be available to stream, and Layden said the publishers would be experimenting with a variety of “rental durations” and prices. So it’s still up in the air as to what games on demand will cost.


PlayStation Vita TV, a console version of Sony’s handheld system, will also come to the West this fall for $99. Layden stressed that the machine, to be called PlayStation TV in the U.S., can be used to play PlayStation 4 games on a second television or stream PlayStation Now games, as well as play PlayStation Vita software on the television.


Sony did also announce many actual exclusive games. Suda 51 (Killer Is Dead) is creating a new horror game for PlayStation 4 called Let It Die; From Software (Dark Souls) has a new game called Bloodborne, and Sony is creating a PS4 version of its make-your-own-levels series LittleBigPlanet. The PS4 version will be able to play, with enhanced graphics, every LittleBigPlanet level that’s been created so far for PlayStation 3.


Grand Theft Auto V will also come to PlayStation 4 in the fall, and Sony said you’d be able to transfer over your progress in GTA Online from either the PS3 version or the Xbox 360 version.


And, expected though it may have been, Sony closed out the show with footage of the new Uncharted game for PlayStation 4.



Ubisoft Brings Back Rainbow Six and More at E3


Rainbow Six. Illustration: Ubisoft

Rainbow Six. Illustration: Ubisoft



A new version of Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six highlighted game publisher Ubisoft’s press conference at E3 on Monday afternoon, which had plenty of top-selling franchises if comparatively few big surprises.


The demonstration of Rainbow Six: Siege showed two groups of five players each — one attempting to defend a hostage inside a suburban house, and another attempting to extract the hostage from the house. The players with the captive could barricade doors and windows and set up massive shields, while the players on offense could use drones to spy on the enemy, then attempt to blow up the walls, floors and ceilings of the house to get the drop on them.


Since Ubisoft owns the rights to use the Tom Clancy name in perpetuity on any old thing it wants, it is also publishing Tom Clancy’s The Division, which is also about shooting people but in a post-apocalyptic world.


Ubisoft demonstrated an upcoming version of its perennially popular Just Dance game, which will now allow players to upload videos of themselves dancing to the songs, which can then be viewed by other players; Ubisoft says the game’s developers will eventually incorporate the best dance moves into actual gameplay.


And it wouldn’t be a Ubisoft conference without Assassin’s Creed; this latest game subtitled Unity is set in the French revolution and allows four players to go through the campaign together. In colorful assassin robes that make them look like Alvin, Simon and Theodore.


A racing game called The Crew promises to let players drive from Miami to New York to Los Angeles and everywhere else in the United States (no, Ubisoft literally promises this) with no loading screens ever. That could be pretty amazing if it works out as good as it sounds. We’ll find out for sure later this year.


The only game of Ubisoft’s that could truly be said to break the mold is Valiant Hearts: The Great War. Made in the UbiArt Framework engine that birthed similar 2-D cartoon games Rayman Legends and Child of Light, it’s a true-to-life story of four soldiers in World War I. It was a pretty depressing trailer that paints a picture of a sad game. But, you know, in a good way.



EA Brings ‘Conceptual Prototypes’ to E3, But Few Finished Games


At its E3 press conference, Electronic Arts said it would give us not just a rundown of what games it plans to produce this year, but a look at the future. The far, far future.


Kicking off the show at the Shrine Auditorium in downtown Los Angeles, CEO Andrew Wilson promised “raw prototypes of what’s to come over the next few years” and “thoughtful reflections on what’s inspiring the future” of videogames.


Things began with a love letter to Star Wars fandom, courtesy of the DICE studio in Sweden. Electronic Arts has the exclusive right to create hardcore console Star Wars games, and it’s starting with Star Wars Battlefront from DICE. The studio studied the original props and models from Star Wars films and even journeyed to the locations where Star Wars films were shot to produce a highly faithful next-gen rendering of the galaxy far, far away. Only early footage of the in-game engine was shown, and we were told not to expect any more news until next spring.


BioWare, after showing its soon-to-come RPG Dragon Age: Inquisition, was the next to show “conceptual prototypes” of the new game in the Mass Effect series as well as a wholly new game franchise that it is building. But it didn’t discuss anything concrete about those games.


“We don’t typically show things this early, but let’s be clear — this is early,” said Patrick Soderlund, EVP of EA Studios, introducing a new game in development from Criterion, makers of the racing series Burnout. “And let’s be honest, there’s no way we could keep this a secret anyway.” It’ll be a first-person game with helicopters, motorcycles, skydiving — not just cars. But it’s doesn’t have a title or anything more than very early prototype footage.


Even Mirror’s Edge, the long-awaited follow-up to the first-person parkour game that came out a few years ago and that was announced at last year’s E3 show, was only shown here in the form of a bare-bones “conceptual prototype” — basic building-block type levels, miles away from a full-on game design — and therefore probably quite far away from release. Sorry to anyone who’s been hoping to play it before they die.


Why all the early looks at the future? Probably because without them, Electronic Arts’ lineup would look hopelessly mundane and predictable. The Sims! Madden! UFC! Golf! (As to that last one, in a particularly hilarious bit of Electronic Artsification, it has now added explosions and violence in the form of “extreme fantasy courses” to this year’s PGA Tour.)


Things wrapped up with Battlefield: Hardline, which leaked all over the internet a few weeks ago. It’s a cops versus criminals game made by Visceral, a studio that used to make unique creepy horror games and now makes shooters like everybody. The developers describe it as “much more like a TV crime drama than a traditional shooter.” The beta of the game is now live on PlayStation 4.



Out in the Open: This Super-Cheap Cellphone Network Brings Coverage Almost Anywhere


OpenBTS and YateBTS help communities replace expensive cellular network infrastructure with open source software. Image: mayo5/Getty

OpenBTS and YateBTS help communities replace expensive cellular network infrastructure with open source software. Image: mayo5/Getty



Antarctica is probably the last place you’d expect cellphone service. But thanks to the Australian government and a company called Range Networks, you’ll soon be able to find a signal near several research facilities on the continent.


Range has already brought GSM service–the same type of network that carries voice calls and text messages elsewhere in the world–to Macquarie Island, a small island just outside the Antarctic Circle. This is preferable to walkie talkies or Wi-Fi because it provides wider coverage while using less energy. And although the network has a satellite uplink to connect it with the rest of the world, it doesn’t depend on satellites for local communications, which is essential to the safety of field researchers.


GSM networks like the one on the island usually cost about a million dollars to build, says Range Networks CEO Ed Kozel. But Range is able to bring the technology to Antarctica for just a few thousand dollars using an open source platform called OpenBTS, short for Open Base Transceiver Station. All you need to run a GSM network with OpenBTS is radio software and an off-the-shelf Linux server. “The legacy infrastructures are why most operators are so expensive to run, but we took a clean slate approach,” Kozel explains.


Thanks to its barebones approach, the technology is a way of bringing cell service to all sorts of remote populations, from Antarctica to rural Indonesia. Big telecommunications companies are unlikely to build traditional networks in such places because they just wouldn’t be profitable. But the economics of open source are very different.


From Indonesia to Iceland


OpenBTS was created by Range Networks co-founder David Burgess in 2008, when he realized he could replace much of the traditional infrastructure involved in cellular networks with software. “My first encounter with mobile networks was in the defense contracting world,” says Burgess, who has since left the company to found a new venture called Legba. “I fell in love with the technology very quickly, but the way GSM was deployed–and still is in the traditional world–is fairly inefficient. There’s a lot of things that made sense back in the 80s when computers were very expensive and consumed a lot of power, but just don’t make sense today.”


Image: Range Networks

Image: Range Networks



Though OpenBTS is typically used remote areas with low populations, it has also inspired some other, unexpected uses. A search and rescue team in Iceland, for instance, used the software to turn one of its helicopters into a flying cellphone tower that can be used to triangulate the location of missing persons.

And yes, the software can be used by hackers to hijack people’s phone calls by spoofing cellphone towers. “It’s not the intent for the company, but because the software is open source, people can do that,” Kozel acknowledges. But the benefits of bringing wireless connectivity to people who otherwise wouldn’t have it, he says, is worth the trade-off.


The Next Step


While Range Networks continues to build new networks in remote areas, Burgess has turned his attention to another problem. He says many network operators are planning to switch over to the widely used LTE cellular standard and shut down their GSM networks in order to save money and open up more of the wireless spectrum for LTE. But many of those networks, he explains, aren’t planning to replace the GSM infrastructure in rural locations with newer LTE infrastructure, which will leave customers in those areas without any access.


After leaving Range last year, Burgess is now focused on a new open source creation called YateBTS. This platform combines code from OpenBTS with another open source project called Yate, which is short for Yet Another Telephony Engine. Burgess says Yate, which was developed by Romanian company NullTeam, acts something like a translator between different types of telecommunications protocols. This lets YateBTS integrate with other network standards.


Burgess hopes Legba, which he started to commercialize YateBTS, will be able to provide network operators with a way of running GSM networks on the same infrastructure, and even within the same spectrum, as their LTE networks. But his ambition is greater than that. He’d also like to revolutionize infrastructure the way Android has revolutionized mobile computing. “What Android did for the handset world was enable a whole new wave of companies and technologies it produced a lot of new products and new competition in the smart phone market,” he says. “What Android did for the handsets we’d like to do for the network.”



That Computer Actually Got an F on the Turing Test


Alan M Turing and colleagues working on the Ferranti Mark I Computer in 1951. Photo: SSPL/Getty Images

Alan M Turing and colleagues working on the Ferranti Mark I Computer in 1951. Photo: SSPL/Getty Images



Over the weekend, a group of programmers claimed they built a program that passed the famous Turing Test, in which a computer tries to trick judges into believing that it is a human. According to new reports, this is a historic accomplishment. But is it really? And what does it mean for artificial intelligence?


The Turing Test has long been held as a landmark in machine learning. Its creator, British computer scientist Alan Turing, thought it would represent a point when computers would have brains nearly as capable as our own. But the value of the Turing Test in modern day computer science is questionable. And the actual accomplishments of the test-winning chatbot are not all that impressive.


The Turing Test 2014 competition was organized to mark the 60th anniversary of Turing’s death and included several celebrity judges, including actor Robert Llewellyn of the British sci-fi sitcom Red Dwarf. The winner was a program named Eugene Goostman, which managed to convince 10 out of 30 judges that it was a real boy. Goostman is the work of computer engineering team led by Russian Vladimir Veselov and Ukrainian Eugene Demchenko.


The program had a few built-in advantages, such as the fact that he was claimed to be a 13-year-old non-native English speaker from Ukraine. It also only tricked the judges about 30 percent of the time (an F minus, or so). For many artificial intelligence experts, this is less than exciting.


“There’s nothing in this example to be impressed by,” wrote computational cognitive scientist Joshua Tenenbaum of MIT in an email. He added that “it’s not clear that to meet that criterion you have to produce something better than a good chatbot, and have a little luck or other incidental factors on your side.”


Screenshots on the BBC’s article about the win show a transcript that doesn’t read like much more than a random sentence generator. When WIRED chatted with Goostman through his programmers’ Princeton website, the results felt something like an AIM chatbot circa 1999.


WIRED: Where are you from?

Goostman: A big Ukrainian city called Odessa on the shores of the Black Sea


WIRED: Oh, I’m from the Ukraine. Have you ever been there?

Goostman: ukraine? I’ve never there. But I do suspect that these crappy robots from the Great Robots Cabal will try to defeat this nice place too.


The version on the website could of course be a different version than was used during the competition.


This particular chatbox almost passed a version of the Turing test two years ago, fooling judges approximately 29 percent of the time.


Fooling around 30 percent of the judges also doesn’t seem like a particularly high bar. While the group claims that no previous computer program has been able to reach this level, there have been numerous chatbots, some as far back as the 1960s, which were able to fool people for at least a short while. In a 1991 competition, a bot called PC Therapist was able to get five out of 10 judges to believe it was human. More recently, there have been fears that online chatbots could trick people into falling in love with them, stealing their personal information in the process. And a 2011 demonstration had a program named Cleverbot manage a Turing Test pass rate of nearly 60 percent.


So where does this 30 percent criterion stem from? It seems to be a particular interpretation of Alan Turing’s 1950 paper where he described his eponymous test.


“I believe that in about fifty years’ time it will be possible, to programme computers… to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 per cent chance of making the right identication after five minutes of questioning,” wrote Turing (.pdf).


So the father of the Turing test wasn’t using this as some threshold for intelligence, he was simply stating his prediction of where he thought computers would be five decades in the future.


For most modern-day artificial intelligence experts, the Turing Test has long since been usurped in importance. It’s not entirely surprising that a 65-year-old test doesn’t hold up, given the lack of data about intelligence — both human and artificial — available at the dawn of the computer age. Today, we have programs that show quite interesting intelligent-like behavior, such as Netflix’s suggestion algorithm, Google’s self-driving car, or Apple’s Siri personal assistant. These are all tailored to specific tasks. What Alan Turing had envisioned was a machine that was generally intelligent; it could just as easily organize your schedule as learn Latin.


This has lead cognitive scientist Gary Marcus of NYU to suggest an updated, 21st-century version of the Turing Test. Writing at the New Yorker’s Elements blog, he said that a truly intelligent computer could “watch any arbitrary TV program or YouTube video and answer questions about its content—’Why did Russia invade Crimea?’ or ‘Why did Walter White consider taking a hit out on Jessie?’” Marcus continues:



Chatterbots like Goostman can hold a short conversation about TV, but only by bluffing. (When asked what “Cheers” was about, it responded, “How should I know, I haven’t watched the show.”) But no existing program—not Watson, not Goostman, not Siri—can currently come close to doing what any bright, real teenager can do: watch an episode of “The Simpsons,” and tell us when to laugh.



Of course, who knows what they’ll say about that test in 50 years time.



Microsoft Kicks Off E3 by Giving Us What We Want: More Games


Phil Spencer speaks at E3. Image: Microsoft

Phil Spencer speaks at E3. Image: Microsoft



Microsoft had a totally different message at this year’s Xbox press briefing.


While it has generally spent its time at E3 splitting its attention between games and the other media functionality of Xbox hardware (Zune music! Skype!), it got a big round of applause from the Xbox fans in attendance at the Galen Center on Monday morning when it said it would focus its entire presentation on games.


New head of Xbox Phil Spencer kicked off the show by acknowledging the fact that Xbox One hasn’t been particularly well-received by gamers, and the numerous changes that Microsoft has had to make to its strategy, and to the fundamental nature of the Xbox One itself, since last year’s show where it pushed an always-online, DRM-heavy, mandatory-Kinect box, all of which it has since rolled back on.


“You are shaping the future of Xbox, and we are better for it,” said Spencer to raucous applause.


For some of the Xbox faithful, the most exciting announcement was four games they’ve already played — Halo: The Master Chief Collection will bring together the first four Halo games, plus a beta of Halo 5, this holiday season. Microsoft got huge applause when it said that over 100 different multiplayer levels — everything, it says, from the Halos one through four — would be included with the game.


The other big announcements were Scalebound, a new action game from Platinum Games (Bayonetta), and the return of the Xbox 360 hit Crackdown — by a new team led by the game’s original creator David Jones.



25 Years Ago Today, Star Trek Went Beyond The Final Frontier (Unfortunately)


Photo by Paramount Pictures

Photo courtesy Paramount Pictures



Today marks the 25th anniversary of a dark day for Star Trek fandom: the release of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, or to give it its proper name, “The Worst Star Trek Movie That Isn’t Star Trek Into Darkness.”


Arguably, The Final Frontier is worse than Into Darkness. It not only matches that movie’s nonsensical plot but adds layers of awkwardly-unfunny comedy and bored actors, with the outcome an uneven, overly-complicated mess. The plot of the movie may have been focused on the attempt of Spock’s half-brother to meet God in the center of the universe, but what The Final Frontier is really about is what happens when a studio demands a blockbuster movie before everyone involved is ready to deliver one (Marvel, you should take note *cough*Ant-Man*cough*).



More than just a hill of beans: Phaseolus genome lends insights into nitrogen fixation

"It doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people doesn't add up to a hill of beans in this crazy world," Humphrey Bogart famously said in the movie Casablanca. For the farmers and breeders around the world growing the common bean, however, ensuring that there is an abundant supply of this legume is crucial, both for its importance in cropping systems to ensure plant vitality and for food security. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science has targeted research into the common bean because of its importance in enhancing nitrogen use efficiency for sustainability of bioenergy crops, and for increasing plant resilience and productivity with fewer inputs, on marginal lands, and in the face of the changing climate and environment.



All plants require nitrogen to thrive, and nitrogen fixation is the process by which atmospheric nitrogen is converted into ammonia. However, many agricultural lands are deficient in nitrogen, leading farmers to rely on fertilizers to supply the needed nutrient for their crops. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the United States imports more than half of the nitrogen used as fertilizer, a total of nearly 11 million tons in 2012. Kidney beans, navy beans, string beans and pinto beans are all varieties of the common bean, which ranks as the 10th most cultivated food crop worldwide. Legumes such as the common bean and soybean, however, can form symbiotic relationships with nitrogen-fixing bacteria. Understanding how such symbiotic relationships are formed and sustained is a crucial to improving agricultural practices as increasing crop yields are desired both for fuel and food production.


To this end, a team of researchers led by Scott Jackson of the University of Georgia, Dan Rokhsar of the U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Jeremy Schmutz of the DOE JGI and the HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology and Phil McClean of North Dakota State University sequenced and analyzed the genome of the common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris. The project was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the work was published online June 8, 2014 in the journal Nature Genetics.


"Unlocking the genetic make-up of the common bean is a tremendous achievement that will lead to future advances in feeding the world's growing population through improved crop production," said Sonny Ramaswamy, director of USDA's National Institute of Food and Agriculture. "While we have much to learn about the application of genomics in agriculture, this study is groundbreaking. I applaud the work of this team of scientists and look forward to their continued work in this important area."


For the study, the team sequenced and assembled a 473-million basepair genome of the common bean. Though it is thought to have originated in Mexico, the common bean was domesticated separately at two different geographic locations in Mesoamerica and the Andes, diverging from a common ancestral wild population more than 100,000 years ago. The team then compared sequences from pooled populations representing these regions, finding only a small fraction of shared genes. This indicated that different events had been involved in the domestication process at each location.


The team looked for regions associated with traits such as low diversity, flowering time, and nitrogen metabolism. They found dense clusters of genes related to disease resistance within the chromosomes. They also identified a handful of genes involved in moving nitrogen around. This information could be beneficial for farmers practicing the intercropping system known as milpa, wherein beans and maize or, occasionally, squash, are planted either simultaneously or else in a relay system where the beans follow maize. The practice ensures that the land can continue to produce high-yield crops without resorting to adding fertilizers or other artificial methods of providing nutrients to the soil.


The team then compared the high quality common bean genome against the sequence of its most economically important relative, soybean. They found evidence of synteny, in which a gene in one species is present in another. They also noted that the common bean's genome had evolved more rapidly than soybean's since they diverged from the last common ancestor nearly 20 million years ago.


"Improvement of common bean will require a more fundamental understanding of the genetic basis of how it responds to biotic and abiotic stresses," the team concluded. "These findings provide information on regions of the genome that have been intensely selected either during domestication or early improvement and thus provide targets for future crop improvement efforts."




Story Source:


The above story is based on materials provided by DOE/Joint Genome Institute . Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.



Silent mutations speak up: Multiple silent mutations greatly impact protein translation

So-called silent DNA mutations earned their title because, according to the fundamental rules of biology, they should be inconsequential. Reported on June 5 in PLOS Genetics online, University of Utah researchers experimentally proved there are frequent exceptions to the rule. The work was conducted in the bacteria, Salmonella enterica, used to study basic biological mechanisms that are often conserved in humans.



"In this post-genomic era, where a patient's DNA sequence can be used to diagnose predisposition to diseases, silent mutations are usually ignored," said senior author Kelly T. Hughes, professor of biology at the University of Utah. "Our data argue that they shouldn't be."


The definition of a silent mutation rests on a fundamental principle in biology. DNA is transcribed into RNA, and RNA is translated into protein. Using an analogy, DNA are letters, and when grouped into three-letter words, they form a code that specifies which protein will be made. A silent mutation is similar to a "c" to "k" change in "the cat ran" and "the kat ran." Despite the alternate spelling, the meaning is the same.


Because Hughes had assumed the dogma on silent mutations to be true, he nearly lost the chance to make an important discovery. Twenty years prior, he had dismissed experimental results implicating a silent mutation as the cause of a severe defect in bacteria.


"We thought there was some other mutation somewhere else that we couldn't find," remarked Hughes. "We didn't realize at the time that we were throwing away gold."


In the years following, evidence started to emerge indicating that silent changes could have serious consequences to bacteria and animals. But the cases were isolated, and it remained to be determined whether they were part of a larger phenomenon.


In light of the new data, Hughes decided to pursue his finding from years ago, but on a broader scale. He developed an assay to test the effects of all possible silent mutations on protein translation in bacteria. The beauty of the system is that it eliminates many of the variables that could be introduced at intermediate steps in the process, meaning any effect on translation should directly link back to the change in DNA.


"I didn't think it would work," said research assistant professor and first author Fabienne Chevance. "I didn't imagine that a single base pair change could have as big of an effect as we saw."


The assay showed that an unexpected one-third of silent mutations caused protein translation to slow down, in some cases decreasing the speed by as much as five-fold. The scientists surmise that just as the alternate spelling in "the kat ran" might cause a reader to hesitate, certain silent mutations causes the ribosomal machinery that carries out translation to balk.


Silent mutations weren't the only types of DNA changes to effect translation efficiency. It turns out that for the words in the sentence -- called codons -- what your neighbors are matters. For example, "the cat ran" could be read faster than "the ran cat." The phenomenon, dubbed "codon context," changed the speed of translation by up to 30-fold.


The implications are that similar changes within any protein coding region could alter the amount of protein made, ultimately impacting the fitness of the organism.


The conclusions fit well with observations from population biologists, who found that specific silent mutations and codon contexts are statistically underrepresented in protein coding regions in many organisms, suggesting those codes could be detrimental. The results from Chevance and Hughes explain the biology behind the statistics and represent the first systematic validation of the phenomena in a living organism in real time.


"We've been able to experimentally prove what population geneticists have believed for decades," said Hughes. "Every DNA base can matter."


The research was funded by NIH PHS grant GM062206.




Story Source:


The above story is based on materials provided by University of Utah . Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.



Game of Thrones’ Battle of Castle Black Made Us Miss Tyrion and Wildfire


Photo: Helen Sloan/HBO

Photo: Helen Sloan/HBO



Well, that was no Battle of the Blackwater. Much like in the penultimate episode of Season 2, Game of Thrones put its kaleidoscope of perspectives on hold to focus in on a single, massive event: the Battle of Castle Black. But while this episode may boast the same director and some similar visual spectacle, it sadly lacked the heft that made “Blackwater” one of the finest episodes in the series.


Demanding a full hour for one storyline from a show like Game of Thrones—especially when there are so many other compelling plotlines to follow—can seem like an act of hubris, but in “Blackwater,” Peter Dinklage’s riveting performance as Tyrion pulled it off with aplomb. Sadly, we have no equivalent performance to anchor the long-awaited showdown between the Night’s Watch and the Wildlings: Jon is no Tyrion; Kit Harrington is no Peter Dinklage; and the supporting cast of Sam, Thorne, Pyp and Grenn are no Joffrey, Cersei, Sansa and the Hound. As necessary as the battle may be to the larger story, it comes across as “important” far more than “interesting,” a bit like mandatory history homework.


Yes, there were some stirring moments—from the falling of the scythe to Alliser Thorne’s surprising turn into an actual hero—but it never coalesced into anything larger than those moments. Rather than the overwhelming, Helm’s Deep-style siege of 100,000 men against 100 it promised, we got a big fight writ small—less an epic battle than a gritty, claustrophobic sortie hacked out in tunnels and courtyards. It’s also a fight with far less significance than we might have hoped. Unlike the crushing defeat of Stannis at the Blackwater, this battle ends with Jon’s buzz-killing observation that it was little more than a minor setback for a foe that is still overwhelmingly likely to kill them all—a rather disappointing payoff for an episode that was already Blackwater-lite.


gameofthrones14_134

HBO/Neil Fingleton



The Battle of Castle Black


Standing on the edge of the world at the probable end of their lives, Sam asks Jon to spill all the juicy details about Ygritte—specifically, “what it was like to love someone and have them love you back.” This is Sam’s version of locker room talk: a blow-by-blow account of exactly how it feels to not be hauntingly lonely. Jon’s no good at translating complex feelings into “words” (and still preoccupied with the idea that he might still have to kill her), so he sends Sam off to bed with no more info about their hot, hot emotional intimacy.


Elsewhere, in the Wildling camp, Tormund is in the midst of some braggadocio of his own, a seemingly oft-told yarn about the time he sexually conquered a bear. The men are amused, but Ygritte is far less interested in hearing about his fictional bear sex while she’s thinking about murdering her former lover. Styr, the leader of the Thenns—aka the guys that make the Wildlings look tame by comparison—accuses her of being soft, so Ygritte declares super-dibs on killing Jon! She swears that she wants to kill him so bad that she’ll have no choice but to straight-up kill anyone who tries to kill him first, which is definitely about wanting him to die and not the complete opposite.


Sam retreats to the library, and ends up having a conversation with Maester Aemon about sex and death, two subjects on the forefront of his mind now that he thinks Gilly is dead. Sam is shocked to hear that Aemon was a bit of a player back in the day—being an heir to the Targaryen throne has a way of attracting the ladies—and that he, too, loved a woman. He suggests they both go to bed and stop thinking about lost loves, but when Sam goes outside he hears a familiar voice: Gilly! After convincing Pyp to let her in, Sam promises never to leave her again because near-death has made Sam bold and full of declarations, but then the two horns sound the approach of Wildlings so they are probably all dead anyway!


As Jon stands heroically on the edge of the wall, watching the forest to the north burn at the hands of the Wildlings, Alliser Thorne admits that they probably should have sealed the tunnel. Jon generously suggests it was a difficult decision (and not Thorne’s ego dooming them all). Sam, meanwhile, locks Gilly and her baby in some sort of meat pantry to keep her safe, and while she doesn’t want him to go because she (quite reasonably) fears that he will die, he says he has to keep his vow “because that’s what men do.” Then he kisses her. Because that is also what men do.


Soon enough, there are mammoths and giants roaring their way, provoking “oh crap” reactions from Jon, Alliser and every other man on the Wall. Soon a second horn blows indicating that Ygritte and her group are approaching the Southern Gate, so Alliser heads down to give a legitimately inspirational speech before leaping into battle himself, proving that it is possible to be both an asshat and a good commander. He delegates command of the Wall to Slynt, who immediately proves that it is also possible to be neither. He’s so bad that the men convince him he’s needed elsewhere, and he immediately runs to hide in the pantry with Gilly while Jon takes charge.


Photo: Helen Sloan/HBO

Photo: Helen Sloan/HBO



Tormund starts tearing through the castle, and has a pretty thrilling fight with Thorne where it’s hard to know for whom to cheer (Thorne loses). Outside, the giants and mammoths set to work on opening the main gate, the one with four inches of rolled steel. They’ve just about got it when a bolt from a ballista hits one of them in the back, sending the other into a Hulk-like rage that finally allows him to lift the gate. Per Jon’s orders, Grenn and several men are waiting for him, chanting their Night’s Watch vows and swearing to HOLD THE GATES!


After watching Ygritte shoot Pyp, Sam retreats to ask Jon for reinforcements, and much like Thorne he puts Dolorous Edd in charge of the Wall and descends to fight the battle himself. Edd ends up dropping the Scythe (good idea, Edd!), a giant blade that pendulums across the wall slicing off the climbers. When Jon returns to the fray, there’s a long, unbroken shot as the camera rings the interior of Castle Black in one circular sweep from character to character and battle to battle. It’s no True Detective six-minute hostage tracking shot, but it’s still a clever way to convey the small-scale carnage of castle fighting.


It finally settles back on Sam, who’s about to welcome an old friend to the fight: Ghost. Hey, know who else likes to eat the men they kill besides the Thenns? Direwolves. Jon finally gets his big battle with Styr and holds his own for a while, until the Thenn’s massive battleaxe sweeps his sword away and he gets his face smashed against an anvil. At the last moment he smashes his head in with a hammer, and turns, exhausted—to see Ygritte.


She has an arrow notched and aimed right at him, but she hesitates and there’s this moment where Jon can’t help but smile at her. He’s so happy to see her that for a second he doesn’t seem to care whether he lives or dies. It’s a sweet but ephemeral moment that lasts until Olly—the little boy whose parents were killed and probably eaten by Wildlings—puts an arrow through her chest… which I would characterize as a perfectly reasonable response, but Jon is devastated, holding Ygritte and swearing that she’ll be OK and that some day they’ll make it back to their awesome sex cave and everything will be fine. This, of course, sets up her up to say what you always knew were going to be her last words: “You know nothing, Jon Snow.”


They manage to capture Tormund, despite his best attempts to die fighting, and while Sam is enthused about their great victory, Jon realizes that this was only round one. Mance was testing their defenses, and while they passed temporarily they’re still outnumbered 100 to one and the next onslaught will likely come that very night. Congratulations on winning the hopeless battle; your prize is another hopeless battle! Jon says he’s going to go find Mance and try to kill him, since it’s the only chance they have. He tells Sam to raise the gate and lower it after him, striding out North of the Wall as everything fades to white.


Photo: Helen Sloan

Photo: Helen Sloan





In the books: The Battle of Castle Black happened almost immediately after Jon’s return to the Night’s Watch, which took place way back in episode one. This battle was slated for episode nine, however, which it why this story took a long, unsatisfying loop that involved wandering to Craster’s Keep and back again, and sending Gilly away and bringing her back.

The tactics are a bit different as well: Mance launched a diversionary attack at another tower to draw out the Night’s Watch, which he followed by a surprise attack from the South by the forces of Tormund and Ygritte. It wasn’t until after their defeat that Mance’s primary army began their attack. There is no giant Wall scythe, unfortunately, and Ghost is not at Castle Black to join the battle.


Jon never learns exactly who shot Ygritte, though he does find her wounded and she does die in his arms. Rather than Alliser Thorne, the Watch is commanded by Donal Noye, and he officially delegates the Wall to Jon when he hears that the gate is failing. It is also he who ends up dying while defending the gate against a giant named Mag the Mighty; both Grenn and Pyp survive the battle. After Noye’s death Jon takes command, with encouragement from Master Aemon, and fends off the siege for several days.


Finally, Jon doesn’t set out to find Mance after the battle, or at least not under the same terms. Instead, Alliser Thorne and Janos Slynt—who missed the battle entirely—arrive with reinforcements and arrest Jon on charges of desertion for his time with the Wildlings (which he’s already faced on the show), proving yet again that they are the Energizer bunnies of being complete asshats. Eventually, they decide to send him out to treat with Mance, thinking it a suicide mission regardless.



A Killer Home Organization System Inspired by Bees




Humans are a messy species, especially when compared to the hyper-efficient and stylish honeybee. It’s a biological deficiency that allows a business like the Container Store to sell $750 million dollars worth of organizational systems every year. Inspired by our human failings, the elegant structure of honeycombs, and the multi-billion dollar market for organization systems, designer Scot Herbst has developed a suite of storage products that will make our homes feel more like hives.


Hyve is a system of hexagonal plastic bins. Each features a clip that allows it to connect to a mate, or one of 80 accessories Herbst has planned, and grow organically into a system designed for a specific space. Magnetic hangers and wooden bars allow Hyve cells to hang on refrigerators and white boards, and durable construction allows the cells to be used in more industrial settings. “The interlocking hexagonal geometry is 100 percent mother nature’s design,” says Herbst. “We’re paying tribute to honey bees for their inspiration and organized energy.”


Herbst has designed storage solutions for clients like Home Depot and Crate & Barrel in the past, but decided to bring this product to market under his own brand. “Often times we have the luxury of designing cool things and handing them off for our clients and partners to struggle through manufacturing and delivering to market,” says Herbst. “When we develop and sell our own products it really forces us to make the right decisions from start to finish.”


This learning has led to some tangible improvements. Nesting cells make for more compact and affordable shipping. Instead of fancy designer packaging, Herbst opted for a low-key, monochrome, and environmentally friendly paperboard ribbon.


Hyve is available for preorder on Kickstarter, where a three pack starts at $19, and for the bargain price of $250, Herbst and company will design a layout tailored for your space.



Google Embraces Docker, the Next Big Thing in Cloud Computing


Illustration: Ross Patton/WIRED

Illustration: Ross Patton/WIRED



Google is putting its considerable weight behind an open source technology that’s already one of the hottest new ideas in the world of cloud computing.


This technology is called Docker. You can think of it as a shipping container for things on the internet–a tool that lets online software makers neatly package their creations so they can rapidly move them from machine to machine to machine. On the modern internet–where software runs across hundreds or even thousands of machines–this is no small thing. Google sees Docker as something that can change the way we think about building software, making it easier for anyone to instantly tap massive amounts of computing power. In other words, Google sees Docker as something that can help everyone else do what it has been doing for years.


‘Google and Docker are a very natural fit. We both have the same vision of how applications should be built.’


“Google and Docker are a very natural fit,” says Eric Brewer, a kind of über-engineer inside Google. “We both have the same vision of how applications should be built.”


On Tuesday, with a keynote speech at a conference in San Francisco, Brewer is set to unveil new ways that Google will combine Docker with its cloud computing services, Google App Engine and Google Compute Engine. For the company, this is a way of fueling interest in these services as it strives to challenge Amazon’s dominance in the burgeoning cloud market. But considering Google’s widely recognized knack for building its own massive internet applications, from Google Search to Gmail, Brewer’s speech will also provide an enormous boost for Docker.


The news will carry a particular weight because it’s coming from Brewer. You can think of him as the patron saint of modern internet architecture. From Google and Amazon to Facebook and Twitter, today’s tech giants run their web services across thousands of dirt-cheap computer servers, using sweeping software tools to transform so many tiny machines into one massive whole. It’s a bit like building computers the size of warehouses. It’s the only viable way of dealing with the ever increasing demands of modern web services. And it all began with Eric Brewer.


In the mid-1990s, as a professor of computer science at the University of California, Berkeley, Brewer built Inktomi, the first web search engine to run on a vast network of cheap machines, as opposed to one enormously powerful–and enormously expensive–computer server. And as the Googles and the Amazons and the Facebooks took this idea to new extremes over the next two decades, they leaned on Brewer’s most famous bit of computing philosophy: the CAP theorem, a kind of guide to how these massive systems must be built. “He is the grandfather of all the technologies that run inside Google,” says Craig Mcluckie, a longtime product manager for Google’s cloud services.


Eric Brewer. Photo: Ariel Zambelich/WIRED

Eric Brewer. Photo: Ariel Zambelich/WIRED



Now, none too surprisingly, Brewer is also a key cog in the Google machine, part of the team of elite engineers that oversee the design of the company’s entire online empire. What this means is that, after reshaping the net the first time around, the slick-bald computing guru is bringing the next wave of new ideas to the realm of online architecture.


It’s not just that he’s helping to refine Google’s global network of data centers, the most advanced operation on the net. Like Amazon and Microsoft and so many others, Google is now offering cloud computing services that let anyone else build and run software atop its vast infrastructure, and Brewer is among those working to impart Google’s particular expertise to all the companies that can benefit from these cloud offerings. Today’s cloud computing services can simplify life for developers–letting them build online software without setting up their own hardware in their own data centers–but in backing Docker, Brewer hopes to make things even easier.


Brewer says that Docker mirrors the sort of thing that Google has done for years inside its own data centers, providing a better way of treating hundreds of machines like a single computer, and he believes it represents the future of software development on the net.


The Super Container


Built by a tiny startup in San Francisco, Docker is open source software that’s freely available to the world at large. At first blush, it may seem like a small thing, but among Silicon Valley engineers, it’s all the rage. “If you believe that what makes life easier for developers is where things are moving, then this containerization thing is where things are moving,” eBay developer Ted Dzuiba told us this past fall. According to Docker, over 14,000 applications are now using its containers, and Brewer says a developer technology hasn’t taken off so quickly and so enormously since the rise of the Ruby on Rails programming framework eight or nine years ago.


That said, the importance of Docker can be hard for even seasoned developers to grasp. For one thing, it’s based on technologies that have been around years. The open source Linux operating system–the bedrock of today’s online services–has long offered “containers” that isolate various tasks on a computer server, preventing them from interfering with one another. Google runs its vast empire atop containers like these, having spent years honing the way they work. But Docker has made it easier to move such containers from one machine to another. “They’ve done a very nice job of making it easy to package up your software and deploy it in a regularized way,” Brewer says. “They’re making the container a more effective container.”


This can help developers in multiple ways. It means that if they build a software application on a laptop, they can immediately move it onto a cloud service and run it–without making changes. But the hope is that it will also let them more easily move applications wherever they want to run them, whether that’s their own data centers or Google cloud services or Amazon’s or a combination of all three. “It can make machines fungible,” says Solomon Hykes, the chief technology officer at Docker and the driving force behind the company’s open source project. This has always been the promise of cloud computing–that we could treat the internet like one giant computer–but we’re nowhere near that reality. Due to the vagaries of different operating system and different cloud services, it can be quite hard to move software from place to place.


The Bigger Effect


Granted, Docker can’t change this over night. First off, in order to run Docker containers, each machine must be equipped with a small sliver of additional software. And though this software is designed to operate in the same way on any version of Linux, Brewer says this isn’t always the case. “It’s not perfect yet. This is an area where both Google and the community have some work to do,” he says. “A container running on one OS may not run on another.”


But if the big operating system makers and the other big cloud services get behind the technology too, we can bootstrap a new world of cloud computing that behaves more like it should, where we can treat all cloud services as a single playground. The good news is that Google isn’t the only one getting behind the technology. Cloud services from Amazon, Rackspace, and Digtial Ocean have also backed the technology, at least in small ways.


We can bootstrap a new world of cloud computing that behaves more like it should, where we can treat all cloud services as a single playground


You might think that this grand vision would end up hurting Google’s cloud business–a business it is deeply interested in expanding. In theory, Docker will make it easier for developers and companies to move their operations off the Google cloud. But the company also realizes that Docker will encourage more people to use its cloud. This will be the bigger effect–the much bigger effect. “It’s OK for them to make it so that payloads can be more easily moved from Google to somewhere else,” says Hykes, “because they’re betting that more payloads will flow in than out.”


For Brewer, containers are all about creating a world where developers can just build software, where they don’t have to think about the infrastructure needed to run that software. This, he says, is how cloud computing will continue to evolve. Developers will worry less about the thousands of machines needed to run their application and more about the design of the application itself. “The container is more of an application-level view of what you’re doing, versus a machine-level view,” he says, “and it’s pretty clear that the application view is more natural and will win in the longterm.”


So many others are saying the same thing. But they’re not Eric Brewer.



The Gaudy Wallpapers That Give Rural Russians a Taste of the Outside World



Traveling between villages in the Russian republic of Udmurtia, photographer Lucia Ganieva discovered an intriguing trend. Almost every home she visited was decorated with brilliant wallpaper depicting lush nature scenes. It wasn’t because rivers were en vogue, rather the decorations represented the dreams of the wider world that the low-income villages might never get to see.

“These are villages where people are not following the trends, but create their own style,” says Ganieva. “The people who live there, most of them are not very rich, however they do have very cosy and colorful houses and I think in this way with their wallpaper they go into dreaming, because they cannot really travel to other countries. But also it’s quite expensive to go to other places in Russia.”


For Ganieva, who was raised in St. Petersburg but now lives in Amsterdam, the wallpaper brought back memories. Her own childhood home in Russia had similar wallpaper. “About 35 years ago it was a big trend in Russia, everywhere all people had this, also my parents when I was a child,” she says.


Ganieva was in the region for two weeks in the summer of 2010, at the invitation of the Rodchenko School of Arts in Moscow to tutor young photographers in the field. While on her own, she began photographing the wallpaper she came across. Dreaming Walls and Land of Birches are the two halves of the project that came out of it. Together they offer a portrait of one of those unexpected expressions of culture you’d probably never hear about if you didn’t stumble upon it yourself.


As nature scenes go, these wallpapers run the gamut. Lakes and rivers, mountain ranges and beach scenes, a cluster of magnolias or tigers crouching in the jungle — they’re about as exotic to this birch-bound part of Russia as you could imagine. Their garish colors are framed with the furniture and miscellany of the homes they decorate. The effect succeeds in pulling the viewer between two Udmurtian environments–those they occupy and those they yearn to visit.


A Cultural Display


More than just the Udmurtian equivalent of a photo of the Eiffel Tower decorating some suburbanite’s bedroom, the images are a window into the values of the region. The republic of Udmurtia is located less than a thousand miles northeast of Moscow, and is home to some 130 different ethnicities–one of the most diverse areas in Russia. The mostly rural people observe a long-standing animist tradition despite an overwhelming influence of Eastern Orthodox Christianity and Islam in the region. This animism–characterized by a worship of nature itself, particularly the birch tree–explains the prevalence of the nature scenes pasted up on everybody’s walls.


“They don’t have icons at home, but in this way the do have their “god” inside their homes,” says Ganieva.


Most of the shooting was accomplished with the guidance of friendly villagers she met during her travels. Ganieva says people in the region are happy to invite people into their homes, and proud to show off the decorations. On several occasions the homeowners would be out working or worshipping in the woods, but since everyone pretty much knows everyone in this region her guides had access to the homes anyway. Once she was inside, it wasn’t hard to find what she was looking for.


“In some houses they have two or three–in the living room, in the bedroom, in the kitchen, but also in the municipality and in a school I took photos, actually everywhere. In some houses they were old, maybe 20 years, but in some houses quite new, maybe a few weeks.”


With the eye-catching wallpaper, it’s easy to overlook the signs of the rooms that contain them. All together the pictures aren’t just an interesting cultural artifact — it’s a whole aesthetic that’s actually quite charming and even beautiful. For Ganieva, it’s a testament to what they represent to the residents.


“It amazed me how they succeeded in creating a special place by combining their furniture, plants and flowers and the wallpapers in a subtle but almost artistic way,” she says.


All photos by Lucia Ganieva